Key Takeaways
- The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is facing criticism for its inability to process misconduct complaints against judges in a timely manner.
- The JSC’s judicial conduct committee (JCC) resolved only 29% of complaints in the 2024-25 financial year, down from 94% in 2021-22.
- The backlog of unresolved complaints has grown to 176, with 94 new complaints carried over into the 2025-26 financial year.
- Most complaints relate to breaches of the Code of Judicial Conduct, including failures of diligence, fair trial obligations, and honourable conduct.
- The erosion of public trust in the judiciary could have broader systemic consequences, including weakening the legitimacy of the courts and undermining the constitutional order.
Introduction to the Crisis
The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is facing mounting criticism for its dramatic collapse in its ability to process misconduct complaints against judges. Over the past four years, unresolved cases have ballooned to unprecedented levels, raising questions about accountability and public trust in the courts. The JSC’s judicial conduct committee (JCC) resolved just 29% of complaints in the 2024-25 financial year, marking a sharp decline from 56% the previous year and a dramatic fall from the 94% resolution rate recorded in 2021-22. This decline in resolution rates has significant implications for the legitimacy of the courts and the rule of law.
The Growing Backlog
The JSC received 132 new complaints in the 2024-25 financial year, the highest in four years, yet only 38 were finalized. This left 94 matters, nearly three-quarters of the total, unresolved and carried into the next financial year. The backlog has accelerated year-on-year, with only six complaints remaining unresolved in 2021-22, growing to 21 in 2022-23, surging to 55 in 2023-24, and nearly doubling again in the current reporting period. Across four years, the JSC received 445 complaints and resolved 269, leaving 176 still pending – about 40% of the total. This growing backlog is a cause for concern, as it undermines the ability of the JSC to hold judges accountable for their actions.
Nature of the Complaints
Most complaints lodged in 2024-25 relate to alleged breaches of the Code of Judicial Conduct, including failures of diligence, fair trial obligations, honourable conduct, and equality. More than half of pending matters appear trapped in administrative limbo, with 56 complaints remaining awaiting determination by the acting chair, while others are stuck at the secretariat processing level, referred to heads of court, or under appeal. Of the complaints resolved during the period, most were dismissed on preliminary grounds. Unresolved cases include two complaints against a Johannesburg acting judge, one alleging dishonesty and the other accusing the judge of accepting a R5 000 bribe to swing a leave-to-appeal ruling. These complaints highlight the need for the JSC to take a more proactive approach to addressing judicial misconduct.
Consequences of Inaction
The Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF) says the sharp rise in complaints and the steep decline in resolution rates are concerning. HSF senior researcher Chanel van der Linde warned that the slowdown has broader systemic consequences, including the erosion of public trust in the judiciary and the rule of law. Public trust in the judiciary – and in the rule of law – depends on confidence that judicial misconduct will be dealt with promptly and decisively. Van der Linde cautioned that erosion of trust risks weakening the legitimacy of the courts and undermining the constitutional order they are meant to protect. The judiciary already functions under significant strain, including heavy caseloads and persistent backlogs, which may act as catalysts for irregular judicial conduct, compounding the number of complaints.
Acknowledging the Problem
Chief Justice Mandisa Maya acknowledged the backlog stems from the committee’s limited composition and small number of members. JSC spokesperson Sesi Baloyi confirmed one complaint against the Johannesburg acting judge has been referred to the head of court. She added the second complaint, lodged by Wiersma, was considered by the JCC on 30 October and is in the process of being finalized. The Chief Justice’s acknowledgement of the problem is a step in the right direction, but more needs to be done to address the underlying issues contributing to the backlog. The JSC must take a more proactive approach to addressing judicial misconduct, including increasing the capacity of the JCC and implementing more efficient processes for resolving complaints.
The Way Forward
With 94 complaints already carried over into the 2025-26 financial year, the JSC enters the new cycle under intensifying pressure to restore credibility and efficiency to its oversight role. The JSC must take immediate action to address the backlog of complaints and ensure that judges are held accountable for their actions. This includes increasing the capacity of the JCC, implementing more efficient processes for resolving complaints, and providing more transparency and accountability in the complaint resolution process. By taking these steps, the JSC can help to restore public trust in the judiciary and ensure that the rule of law is upheld. Ultimately, the legitimacy of the courts depends on the ability of the JSC to hold judges accountable for their actions, and it is imperative that the JSC takes a more proactive approach to addressing judicial misconduct.