A law research unit which provides reports on nominees for appointment as judges, has criticised the limited time available for comment on candidates’ judicial track records.
The Democratic Governance and Rights Unit (DGRU) at the University of Cape Town says that especially “grassroots community organisations, whose clients are often regular users of the courts”, would benefit from having more time to respond to shortlisting of potential judges.
The DGRU is also concerned that the initial shortlist of candidates for two sets of vacancies was increased following intervention by Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng.
The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) is due to interview five shortlisted candidates next week for two vacancies in the Eastern Cape High Court – one each in Bhisho and Grahamstown.
The JSC will also interview seven sitting judges for two vacancies on the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein and seven candidates for the judge-president’s post in Limpopo.
Appointments are also sought for head of court in KwaZulu-Natal and Land Claims Court.
The DGRU has made reports available to the JSC since 2009 of summaries of judgments of candidates for judicial appointment while sitting as acting judges or as judges for higher positions, to provide an objective insight into their judicial records.
The reports are also intended to assist civil society with a basis on which to assess candidates’ suitability for appointment to the bench.
The unit does not advocate for or against specific appointments, neither does it provide analysis or criticism of the judgments summarised.
It says judgments are provided that show evidence of ground-breaking decisions and of independent-mindedness, depth of research and analysis, capacity for hard work and of the development of a candidate’s judicial philosophy.
In its latest report on the judicial records of nominees for appointment to the Supreme Court of Appeal, the high court and the land claims court, the DGRU says it had previously raised concerns about the limited time available to prepare submissions to the JSC.
It said the initial shortlist was released early in March and comments had to be submitted by March 27, leaving just over three weeks to research candidates, “insufficient time to conduct adequate, in-depth research into the judicial backgrounds of the candidates”.
The unit has also criticised the release of an amended shortlist of candidates, which included additional names for the SCA and Limpopo High Court vacancies, done after the JSC’s “sifting” committee consulted with the chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng.
While acknowledging that the rules governing the JSC processes made allowance for additional names to be added to a shortlist, the DGRU said it was “puzzling that these candidates were not shortlisted in the first place”. — rayh@dispatch.co.za
Little time to check…
The Democratic Governance and Rights Unit (DGRU) at the University of Cape Town says that especially “grassroots community organisations, whose clients are often regular users of the courts”, would benefit from having more time to respond to shortlisting of potential judges.
The DGRU is also concerned that the initial shortlist of candidates for two sets of vacancies was increased following intervention by Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng.
The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) is due to interview five shortlisted candidates next week for two vacancies in the Eastern Cape High Court – one each in Bhisho and Grahamstown.
The JSC will also interview seven sitting judges for two vacancies on the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein and seven candidates for the judge-president’s post in Limpopo.
Appointments are also sought for head of court in KwaZulu-Natal and Land Claims Court.
The DGRU has made reports available to the JSC since 2009 of summaries of judgments of candidates for judicial appointment while sitting as acting judges or as judges for higher positions, to provide an objective insight into their judicial records.
The reports are also intended to assist civil society with a basis on which to assess candidates’ suitability for appointment to the bench.
The unit does not advocate for or against specific appointments, neither does it provide analysis or criticism of the judgments summarised.
It says judgments are provided that show evidence of ground-breaking decisions and of independent-mindedness, depth of research and analysis, capacity for hard work and of the development of a candidate’s judicial philosophy.
In its latest report on the judicial records of nominees for appointment to the Supreme Court of Appeal, the high court and the land claims court, the DGRU says it had previously raised concerns about the limited time available to prepare submissions to the JSC.
It said the initial shortlist was released early in March and comments had to be submitted by March 27, leaving just over three weeks to research candidates, “insufficient time to conduct adequate, in-depth research into the judicial backgrounds of the candidates”.
The unit has also criticised the release of an amended shortlist of candidates, which included additional names for the SCA and Limpopo High Court vacancies, done after the JSC’s “sifting” committee consulted with the chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng.
While acknowledging that the rules governing the JSC processes made allowance for additional names to be added to a shortlist, the DGRU said it was “puzzling that these candidates were not shortlisted in the first place”. — rayh@dispatch.co.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos