Maya’s recommendation process was tainted, irrational: Helen Suzman Foundation
The Helen Suzman Foundation believes the Judicial Service Commission interview of Judge Mandisa Maya was a tainted, irrational and degrading process.
Maya was recommended as the new Chief Justice following interviews last week with four hopefuls.
Maya is the president of the Supreme Court of Appeal and, if appointed, she will become the country’s first-ever female head of the judiciary.
“Many in South Africa will want to applaud the possible appointment of our first female Chief Justice, but the recommendation of justice Maya as a result of a tainted, irrational, degraded process is no victory at all.
“Far from suggesting that women might take the helm of the judiciary based on merit and their own intrinsic worth, it perversely suggests that they can only do so as a result of a corrupted, debased process,” says Nicole Fritz, who is the Executive Director of the foundation.
Freedom Under Law’s Johan Kriegler, who is a former Constitutional Court Justice, says the appointment is the president’s exclusive prerogative.
“Certainly, I have no position on that and I will not comment, the president will now decide upon the identity of the person whom he wishes to appoint as chief justice, it is the president’s exclusive power to decide and now he has to decide."
Judges Matter’s researcher Mbekezeli Benjamin says they welcome the recommendation but are concerned by the conduct of the Judicial Service Commission.
“We think the JSC has made the correct decision, however, we are concerned by the conduct of certain commissioners in the JSC, we are calling for the JSC to change rules of procedures to ensure that there is a code of conduct for commissioners and also have a clear set of criteria that it will use in determining decisions like these in the future.”
ALSO READ:
