Legal body accused SA Bar of racism

The Advocates for Transformation has accused the General Council of the Bar of South Africa of racism, acting beyond its keeper of morals role and entering into politics.

The accusations stem from the decision taken at the council’s (GCB) 73rd annual general meeting to appeal the Supreme Court of Appeals’ July 10 decision to overturn the high court’s ruling to strike Nomgcobo Jiba and Lawrence Mrwebi from the roll of advocates.

Jiba, the deputy national director of public prosecutions and Mrwebi, the special director of public prosecutions, were struck off the roll on September 15 2016.

This is after the GCB submitted that the two senior NPA members were “not fit and proper” to hold office after they decided to drop charges against former crime intelligence head Richard Mdluli.

In a scathing press statement, AFT general secretary and chairman of the Bhisho Bar of Advocates Mzwandile Ntsaluba said the GCB was inconsistent and showed “astonishing” leniency to white members.

Ntsebeza said a group of seven white members of the Pretoria Bar of Advocates were not struck off the roll of advocates in 2003 and only got away with a suspension after they were found guilty of defrauding the state of millions by charging the Road Accident Fund (RAF) for non-existing work and overcharging for little work done.

GCB chairman Craig Watt-Pringle denied any racial bias in a WhatsApp response.

“I can tell you in advance that the accusations of racial and political motivation for the GCB’s decision are denied. For some reason AFT seeks to protect Ms Jiba and Mr Mwrebi from scrutiny by the Constitutional Court.

“AFT should be called upon to explain why it is not prepared to put its faith in the Constitutional Court given the fact that two judges in Pretoria and two in Bloemfontein [four judges in all] found that Jiba and Mwrebi are not fit and proper persons to be on the roll of advocates, whereas three in Bloemfontein found the opposite,” he said.

“That division of judicial opinion is the principle reason why the GCB holds the view the matter should receive the attention of the highest court.”

But Ntsaluba insisted the GCB treated white advocates differently.

“AFT is concerned about the intolerable inconsistency of the GCB in its exercise of its custos morum [Latin phrase which means keeper of morals] role these last 10 years,” he said.

“In 2013, seven members of the Pretoria Bar [including two senior counsel] were found guilty by their society of multiple counts of double-briefing [including accepting briefs to run more than one trial in one day] and over-reaching [including charging fees for work that was not done or more than is justified by the actual work done] against the RAF.

“Millions of rands were lost to the state as a result. The Pretoria High Court, refusing to strike them off the roll of advocates, imposed sanctions of suspension.

“On appeal by the GCB, the majority of the SCA, to the chagrin of the minority judgment in that case, refused to strike off these members ...

“Yet, the GCB decided not to take the judgment on appeal to the Constitutional Court.”