Magistrates who drink on the job, decide cases behind closed doors for monetary gain, steal, murder, and intimidate and threaten members of the public came under the spotlight in Parliament yesterday.
The magistrates’ commission yesterday reported separately to the portfolio committee on justice and constitutional development and the select committee on security and constitutional development on the removal or the suspension, pending outcomes of criminal and internal investigations, of seven magistrates.
A recommendation that two of the magistrates - one in the George area and one in Mitchell’s Plain - be removed from office was supported by the select committee. It found that the two were not “fit and proper” to hold office. The portfolio committee supported one removal and wanted more information on the other.
The magistrate from Mitchell’s Plain had worked both as an attorney and as a magistrate, said magistrate Hans Meijer, judicial quality assurance officer for the magistrates’ commission, in presenting the recommendations to the committees. The magistrate had misinformed the Law Society when he had sought to practise as an attorney at the same time as being a magistrate, claiming the move had been approved by the commission.
The “clash of interest” and his misrepresentation to the Law Society was “totally unethical” and “dishonest”, both committees said, agreeing he should be removed as a magistrate. He could continue practising as an attorney.
In another case a woman magistrate, on probation as an additional magistrate in George, was found guilty of five charges against her and now faces a further charge of committing perjury. The perjury charge related to the magistrate having lied under oath. She later admitted to the lies, saying “it is easier to lie on paper than in front of people”, said Meijer.
One of the charges related to when she was still an attorney and withheld money she had won for a pensioner client (R61 800) until forced to return it when the Law Society got involved. The case had continued while she was a magistrate, which is why the magistrates’ commission had been involved.
Meijer said the magistrate, known as a big gambler (spending about R9 million at a local casino), also fraudulently gave the casino a cheque for cash which later bounced.
He said she also intimidated an estate agent when the estate agent refused to return a deposit the magistrate had made on a property she had changed her mind about.
One magistrate, from the Free State, who was still on suspension until his case could be finalised, had allegedly been drunk while hearing a case. While under suspension, he was arrested for drunk driving and turned up at court for his case a while later drunk as well, it is alleged. While the case was not brought to the committees for further reporting, it was discussed in the portfolio committee.
“It is clear the man has an alcohol problem and that he seems to be an unrehabilitatable alcoholic. Is there any way that instead of a misconduct case against him, he could rather be looked at being medically boarded?” the portfolio committee asked the commission. The commission said it would look into it.
The two committees agreed to the recommendation that four other magistrates – who have cases of theft, involving themselves in private matters using their power as magistrates to intimidate people, as well as corruption, among others – be suspended pending investigation.
A magistrate, a prosecutor and an attorney allegedly worked in cahoots to take money from car thieves taking vehicles across the border in exchange for the accused’s freedom. The case against the three is in a criminal court and has been postponed.
An Eastern Cape magistrate allegedly tried to get an investigating officer to drop charges against a stock thief and also allegedly harassed and threatened an Indian businessman, allegedly saying if he did not sign an agreement with an employee, he “would send him back to Bangladesh”.
There were no formal court processes in these cases, but the businessman had sent a letter from his attorney to the magistrate forbidding him to interfere with the man’s business. The magistrate has a number of theft charges being investigated against him. The case had been postponed.
Meanwhile, two magistrates had their suspensions lifted against them by the portfolio committee. One of the magistrates, from Ermelo, who was back in office, had been found guilty of 10 charges of conducting himself in an “unbecoming and embarrassing” manner towards a female clerk.
In mitigation he had witnesses to back his claims that he had been provoked. The presiding officer found that the man’s misconduct was serious but did not justify a sanction of removal from office. He was cautioned, reprimanded and had to apologise in writing to her.
The commission’s recommendation that the suspension be lifted was agreed to by the portfolio committee. - Cape Times