Judge President asks SCA for ‘foul’ language correction

Limpopo High Court Judge President Ephraim Makgoba has written to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) to refute its judgment that he swore in court, reports News24. The SCA had reprimanded him for appearing to use foul language during a judgment he handed to a convicted police officer. In a letter to the SCA Registrar, Makgoba said he would never ‘stoop so low as to use foul language in a court or at any forum for that matter’. In its judgment, the SCA said Makgoba's language in the transcript was ‘unacceptable’ and ‘offensive’. The judgment stated that, assuming the transcription was accurate, Makgoba said ‘it is shit’ when he referred to the evidence of one of the witnesses. In 2019, Makgoba handed sentences, ranging from 18 to 20 years behind bars, to former Marble Hall police constable David Komane and four accomplices for an R11m heist at the G4S cash depot in December 2015. Komane appealed the matter but failed. However, he wrote to SCA President Mandisa Maya, to ask for the ruling dismissing his leave to appeal to be reconsidered. In its judgment, which dismissed Komane's application again, the SCA found that the trial court convicted him correctly.

However, Judge Yvonne Mbatha came down hard on the Limpopo judge, saying it was unacceptable for a judicial officer to use profane language in a judgment. ‘As judicial officers, we need to show decorum and respect to everyone, irrespective of their station in society or the nature of the evidence they give,’ she said last week. Makgoba denied that he had used foul language in his judgment, notes News24. ‘I wish to put it on record that the transcription is not accurate. The transcribers have erred in their transcription of my judgment. The correct transcription should be “it is a shot”. In my judgment, I mentioned a large quantity of medicine as opposed to a small quantity of medicine, being “a shot of medicine”,’ he said. He said the transcribers could not have heard his voice clearly on the recording. The letter continued: ‘I wish to further put it on record that my judgment was delivered ex-tempore. The transcribed record of proceedings in the court a quo was submitted to the SCA without my transcribed judgment being submitted to me for editing and signing off.' He said he was not blaming Mbatha because her comments were made on the assumption that it was accurate. But had Mbatha taken up the issue with him before writing her judgment, this ‘unfortunate and regrettable error could have been corrected’. He asked that the relevant paragraph of the judgment be corrected.