Democratic processes aside, when a tainted judge helps select other judges for the Bench, can the whole process then not be tainted?
Well, we can say that, although there might be those among us who cannot believe that impeached judge John Hlophe has been chosen to adjudicate future appointments to the judiciary, at least our democratic system is working.
Hlophe, after all, was chosen by his party, uMkhonto weSizwe (MK), to be not only a member of parliament but also its chief whip in the House of Assembly.
And MK is in that House fair and square, duly elected by 14% of South Africans who voted at the end of May.
ALSO READ: Black Lawyers Association supports impeached judge Hlophe’s legal right to sit on JSC
Also, a majority of MPs in the House chose him to be one of their number who will sit on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). That – again, like it or not – is democracy at work.
The question is whether democracy – or the weight of numbers – should trump (no pun intended) our judicial system and its ethical basis.
Hlophe was, it must not be forgotten, impeached by this same parliament for unethical behaviour in trying to pervert the course of justice in favour of his friend, Jacob Zuma, the man behind MK.
While many sympathetic to MK and Hlophe are construing his travails as some sort of white monopoly capital-led plot against Africans, his selection to the JSC is problematic in a number of ways.
ALSO READ: ‘MK party has done a huge justice to Parliament’ – MP after Hlophe’s JSC nomination (VIDEO)
Any candidate who appears before the commission may correctly argue that Hlophe is the last person who can sit in judgment on anyone when it comes to matters of probity.
But, also, his political “resurrection” into such a position of influence makes a mockery of the image of our judicial system as being impartial.
When a tainted judge helps select other judges for the Bench, can the whole process then not be tainted?
And what else lies in store from MK and its allies in its campaign to “Africanise” the law?
