Judge Motha reprimanded following Solidarity complaint over race-related remarks

Solidarity’s Legal Network welcomes the Judicial Conduct Committee’s (JCC) ruling on the complaint against Judge Madlankosi Motha, whose remarks about the race of legal practitioners in a 2024 case attracted widespread attention.

According to the ruling, Judge Motha must be issued with a warning not to make similar remarks again. The Gauteng Judge President, Ledwaba, must also reprimand him within 15 days of the ruling.

The matter stems from a letter Judge Motha sent to four advocates. In the letter, he demanded an explanation as to why none of the advocates who appeared against one another in a case before the Gauteng High Court concerning black empowerment scorecards was black.

He wanted to know whether this amounted to a violation of section 9(2) of the Constitution, which provides for measures to address historical disadvantage.

Advocate Johan Brand SC objected and submitted a memorandum instead of the requested heads of argument. He argued that the advocates’ race had no bearing on the merits of the case and that clients and the State Attorney should be free to choose their legal representatives based on their experience and expertise.

Solidarity’s Legal Network subsequently also lodged a complaint against Judge Motha. This complaint led to the present ruling, in terms of which Motha is to be reprimanded.

The Legal Network maintains that judges must be held accountable through the appropriate processes when their conduct raises questions about discrimination, constitutionality or judicial impartiality.

According to Emíl Glas, organiser of Solidarity’s Legal Network, an advocate appearing before a court should be able to present a client’s case without having to explain why someone of a different skin colour was not appointed.

“When race is brought into a matter in this way, despite having no bearing, in our view, on the merits of the case, it undermines both the advocate’s professional standing and the client’s freedom to choose legal representation,” says Glas.

“Public confidence in the judiciary rests on the knowledge that people’s cases will be decided on the facts and the law. An independent judiciary and a credible complaints process reinforce one another.

“Members of the legal profession must know that they can rely on Solidarity’s Legal Network when they are adversely affected by conduct of this nature,” says Glas.

Solidarity says the legal profession must be robustly defended against remarks or conduct that undermine professional merit and individual choice based on race.

Solidarity’s Legal Network welcomes the long-awaited ruling. While this may be a small victory, it is a step in the right direction. The Solidarity Legal Network will continue to defend the pride and integrity of the legal profession, no matter how long it takes.