Swaziland’s suspended Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi is fighting hard to prevent an inquiry
into his alleged abuse of power taking place.
He is using every avenue
available to him to frustrate the hearing by the Swazi Judicial Service
Commission (JSC).
Observers of Swaziland
will not have missed the irony that Ramodibedi is claiming his constitutional rights
have been violated. Ramodibedi has presided over a legal system in Swaziland
where King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch and
the kingdom’s constitution has been ignored on numerous occasions, often by Ramodibedi
himself.
Most notable was the case
of Bhekhi
Makubu and Thulani
Maseko, who are presently serving two year jail sentences for writing and
publishing magazine articles critical of Ramodibedi in particular and the Swazi
judicial system more generally.
A warrant was issued for Ramodibedi’s
arrest on 17 April 2015 on charges
including abuse of power. He was later suspended from office pending an inquiry
into his behaviour. The start of the JSC inquiry has been postponed
twice to give Ramodibedi time to prepare his defence.
In the meantime, Ramodibedi
has unsuccessfully tried to get the High Court to overturn
the arrest warrant. He is also trying to get members of the JSC inquiry
disbarred from sitting in his case because he claims they are biased against
him. He claims his constitutional rights are being violated and he will not be
given ‘a fair hearing by an
impartial Commission’. The Swaziland High Court is expected to hear
the arguments on Monday (8 June 2015).
Ramodibedi has been in the spotlight for a number of
years over the way he runs the Swazi judiciary on behalf of King Mswati who
appointed him to office in violation of the Constitution: the office Chief
Justice has to be a Swazi national but Ramodibedi is from Lesotho.
Many allegations of abuse of power have been made
from lawyers within Swaziland and also by the international human rights
community.
In May 2014, two Supreme Court judges reportedly
threatened to resign if a warrant issued by Ramodibedi for the arrest of
three High Court judges who were critical of him was served, Ramodibedi reportedly
issued the warrants but the Swazi police did not make the arrests.
The three judges were Mumcy Dlamini, Bheki Maphalala
and Mbutfo Mamba.
Reportedly, arrest warrants were issued because the
CJ felt the judges were ‘ignoring his orders and bringing the High Court into
disrepute’.
It was reported
at the time that should the warrants be effected and the judges arrested,
the CJ planned to appoint interim judges himself.
This was not an isolated incident of abuse of power.
In a report on Swaziland covering the year 2011, Human
Rights Watch stated, ‘Serious deficiencies in Swaziland’s judicial system
persist. In an ominous precedent for the independence of the judiciary, Chief
Justice Michael Ramodibedi in August suspended Justice
Thomas Masuku for insubordination and for insulting the king, among other
charges.’
It added, ‘On August 11 [2011] Justice Masuku
appeared before the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), whose six members are
appointed by the king. On September 27 [2011] the king relieved Judge Masuku of
his duties for “serious misbehavior.” Justice Masuku had in the past made
several rulings in favor of human rights.’
In the case of Masuku, Ramodibedi acted
as judge, prosecutor and witness in the case he himself brought.
David Matse, the Swaziland Minister for Justice, was
fired from his job because he refused to sign the dismissal letter for
Masuku.
Human Rights Watch added, ‘Control over the daily
allocation of cases for hearings, including urgent ones, has been placed solely
in the hands of the chief justice, creating what is perceived by lawyers as an
unacceptable bias in the administration of justice. In August [2011] the Law
Society of Swaziland instituted a boycott of the courts to protest these
developments and the failure of the authorities to hear its complaints
regarding the running of the courts, including the chief justice’s allocation
of cases. On September 21[2011], Law Society members delivered a petition to
the minister of justice calling for action to address the decisions of the
chief justice and the general administration of justice in the court system.’
In August 2011, Swazi
police in bullet-proof vests and armed with shotguns and tear gas canisters
invaded a meeting of lawyers in the Swaziland High Court, which had been called
to discuss their on-going campaign to get Ramodibedi removed from office.
Reports in the Swazi media said the Chief Justice himself ordered the police to
break up the meeting.
In September 2011, the Centre
For Human Rights, Swaziland, reported, ‘Swaziland lawyers embarked on the
court boycott after the CJ issued a series of unlawful practice directives, to
all courts of the land, directing them not to admit certain cases. In one
directive, the CJ instructed the Registrar that cases would only be allocated
to judges by the CJ himself, and no other officer. In another practice
directive, issued in June 2011, the CJ instructed the Registrar and officers of
all courts in the land that cases involving the king should not be admitted.
These regrettable actions of the CJ were largely viewed as interference not
only with the administration of the courts, but also as a denial of the
fundamental right to access justice.’
In November 2011, the Open Society Initiative for
Southern Africa (OSISA) reported,
‘Lawyers have been boycotting the courts for almost four months in protest at
the maladministration of justice
in the country by the incumbent Chief Justice, Michael Ramodibedi. But this
week, they upped the pressure on the Chief Justice by staging a mass walk-out
of the Supreme Court. This left all suspects and people with civil cases with
no legal representation.
‘But astonishingly, the Chief Justice ordered that
all cases be heard with or without the lawyers. This, as some have already
observed, is the height of injustice. The Chief Justice is also on record as
praising people who represented themselves saying that they actually argue “much
better than the lawyers”.
‘Subsequent to the directive to proceed without the
lawyers, Ramodibedi then went another step further - banning all lawyers from
setting foot in the High Court. A heavily armed police contingent has been
posted in and around the High Court premises and only government lawyers and
people with cases have been allowed to enter. Banned from meeting at the High
Court, the lawyers opted for a very innovative strategy, using their vehicles
to “march” through the capital city in protest and bringing the city to a
stand-still - much to the consternation of the police.’
See
also
JURISTS:
DEEP FLAWS IN JUSTICE SYSTEM
SWAZI
JUDICIAL CRISIS: KING’S WORD IS LAW
No comments:
Post a Comment