Questions raised about alleged Hlophe ‘racism incident’

Paul Hoffman SC, Director of the Centre for Constitutional Rights, points out that the latest JSC press release ignores the so-called ‘racism incident’ on which the integrity of Hlophe has been called into question, reports E-Brief News. He says the denial on national television news by Hlophe that he called attorney Joshua Greeff ‘a piece of white shit’ who should ‘go back to Holland’ has been called into question by Advocate Peter Hazell SC in his complaint to the JSC. ‘Both Greeff and his counsel, Advocate Dirk Uijs SC, a member of the Cape Bar in good standing since 1980, have said that the incident did occur. It happened according to them in the presence of Judge Ndita, then an acting judge whose authority was being angrily defended,’ says Hoffman, who adds: ‘Her version of the event has never been made public, nor has that of the prosecutor who was present. On the other hand the Uijs affidavit confirming his version of the incident stands. It is not the incident itself which creates the impeachment worthy charge, but the fact that the Judge President may have been mendacious when he denied it on public television.’

Hoffman also questions whether the majority of the JSC have avoided or failed to grasp the enormity of this charge. He argues that subsequent developments have put the Judge President into a ‘catch 22’ situation. ‘If his denial of racism toward Greeff is genuine, then the affidavit by Uijs is perjured and Uijs is guilty of a criminal offence,’ says Hoffman. ‘Why then did Judge Hlophe allow the Minister of Justice to appoint Uijs to serve as an acting judge in his division of the High Court,’ he asks. ‘If one accepts the truth of the denial by him that the Greeff incident took place, then he has stood by and allowed the appointment of a perjurious senior advocate to his Bench. If the truth of his denial is not accepted, then there is reason to suppose that the Judge President did not tell the truth when he publicly denied that he had made the racist remarks. Either way, the inference is inescapable that he is not, as Judge Johann Kriegler has argued, a fit and proper person to be a judge, let alone a Judge President.’ Full Hoffman statement on the Legalbrief Today site Latest comments on the Hlophe debate in the sidebar on the right