Former judge Nkola Motata is planning his legal strategy. Picture: Timothy Bernard / Independent Newspapers
DISGRACED former Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, judge Nkola Motata is expected to meet his legal team next week to map a way forward after the Constitutional Court dismissed his application challenging his removal from office.
In December, the apex court dismissed Motata’s bid to overturn the National Assembly’s decision recommending his impeachment for driving into a Johannesburg home while drunk in 2007.
”The Constitutional Court has considered the application for direct access. It has decided that no case has been made for direct access,” the country’s highest court ruled last month.
Motata’s lawyer Simeon Ngomane said he would meet the ex-judge to consult on the way forward next week.
”We are still going to have a consultation next week, we next arranged to have a consultation next week,” he said, adding that he would know after the consultations the judge’s next step.
Ngomane said his client, who is 78 and was discharged as a judge in 2017, was in good health.
In his application to the Constitutional Court, Motata said he was placed on special leave following the incident in 2007.
Motata said in his affidavit to the Constitutional Court that the National Assembly lacked jurisdiction to pass a resolution to remove him from office and that the resolution was motivated and obtained by misrepresentation.
“I was subjected to double jeopardy having complied and served my punishment as imposed by the JSC (Judicial Service Commission),” Motata claimed.
Motata cited three grounds for the application, which included that the Judicial Conduct Tribunal earlier found him guilty of misconduct not amounting to gross misconduct and imposed a fine of R1.1 million, which he did pay to an institution called the South Africa Judicial Education Institute.
The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA), however, following an appeal by Freedom Under Law, found him guilty of gross misconduct and instructed the JSC to submit this finding to the National Assembly for a resolution in terms of the Constitution.
Motata stated that the parliamentary committee recommended his removal to the National Assembly, despite no finding of gross misconduct by the JSC.
He added that the parliamentary committee, through its chairperson, misled and misrepresented to Parliament that a finding of gross misconduct had been made against him.
Another objection raised by Motata was the rejection of his argument of double jeopardy (double punishment for the same crime) in relation to the fine imposed and already paid by him.
“The issue, though placed before the SCA, was not considered and dealt with by it when it substituted the initial finding of the JSC.”
Motata said he had been punished, and he had paid his dues – his fine – and he cannot be punished twice. According to him, the parliamentary committee failed to take this into account.
In motivating his direct access application to the Constitutional Court, Motata said it is in the interest of justice that he be heard.
“The impeachment of a judge is a matter of national importance and general public interest. It also involves constitutional issues.
“Since the inception of the constitutional democracy in South Africa, I am the first alongside Judge President (John) Hlophe to undergo such a process as a judge,” he explained.
loyiso.sidimba@inl.co.za
zelda.venter@inl.co.za
Related Topics: