The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) condemns the politically motivated court action by the Helen Suzman Foundation seeking to remove the President of the EFF and Commander-in-Chief, Julius Malema, from participation in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
According to court papers filed in the Western Cape High Court, the Helen Suzman Foundation argues that Parliament has a constitutional obligation to determine whether President Malema remains “fit and proper” to serve on the JSC. The Foundation claims that Malema’s criticism of members of the judiciary, and his public comments regarding certain judicial decisions and conduct, undermine the integrity and independence of the courts.
This application is a dangerous and dishonest attempt to redefine democratic criticism as constitutional misconduct. The implication advanced by the Helen Suzman Foundation is that members of Parliament who hold strong views about the judiciary, particularly views critical of judges or judicial outcomes, should be excluded from constitutional oversight bodies. Such reasoning is fundamentally anti-democratic and seeks to impose an artificial culture of silence around institutions that exercise immense political and constitutional power.
The EFF rejects the myth that the judiciary exists above criticism. In any constitutional democracy worthy of the name, criticism of the judiciary is protected under freedom of expression and forms part of necessary democratic accountability. Judges are not beyond scrutiny, particularly in a society where the judiciary has increasingly become a site of political contestation, selective morality, and inconsistency in the application of justice.
The Helen Suzman Foundation’s application emerges in a context where sections of the judiciary and prosecutorial institutions have consistently avoided confronting political power when it resides within the establishment represented by President Cyril Ramaphosa. The EFF has been consistent in exposing these contradictions, particularly in relation to the Phala Phala scandal.
During the Phala Phala scandal, South Africans were presented with evidence suggesting the concealment of millions of undeclared foreign currency, allegations of kidnapping, abuse of state resources, unlawful cross-border transactions, tax violations and obstruction of justice linked to Cyril Ramaphosa and his farm.
Yet throughout this scandal, the Helen Suzman Foundation maintained a deafening silence. They did not rush to court demanding accountability from Ramaphosa. They did not question the integrity of institutions that shielded him. They did not express concern when Parliament was manipulated to suppress impeachment proceedings. The hypocrisy of the Helen Suzman Foundation is further exposed by its long-standing interventions in matters relating to the JSC itself. The Foundation has repeatedly sought to litigate against JSC processes and outcomes whenever judicial transformation or political perspectives outside their own within the Commission.
Their latest application is therefore part of a broader campaign to delegitimise voices within the JSC that confront the judiciary on matters of accountability and transformation.
The overreach of the Helen Suzman Foundation is further exposed by the extraordinary scope of its application, which goes far beyond merely targeting President Malema personally. The Foundation is now effectively asking the courts to redesign the entire framework governing the JSC itself.
In its court papers, the Helen Suzman Foundation reportedly argues that the Judicial Service Commission Act is constitutionally deficient because it does not contain rigid mechanisms to regulate the conduct of JSC commissioners. The organisation wants the Western Cape High Court to declare portions of the legislation constitutionally invalid on the basis that the Act does not compel the JSC to adopt a binding code of conduct for commissioners, nor provide punitive sanctions for alleged breaches.
The Foundation is therefore asking the court not only to intervene in the composition of the JSC, but also to impose a judicially supervised regulatory framework over the internal functioning of a constitutionally established body. It further seeks an interim arrangement compelling the JSC to adopt and enforce a binding code of conduct while Parliament is instructed to amend the legislation. This is an alarming example of institutional overreach by an unelected liberal pressure group seeking to use the courts to fundamentally reshape constitutional bodies according to its own ideological preferences. The Helen Suzman Foundation is effectively inviting the judiciary to assume powers that belong to Parliament and democratic political processes, while simultaneously claiming to defend constitutional separation of powers.
The EFF maintains that criticism of judicial conduct, judicial inconsistency and judicial overreach is not an attack on the Constitution. On the contrary, democratic oversight and political engagement strengthen constitutional democracy by ensuring that no institution becomes immune from public scrutiny.
The timing of this litigation confirms that it forms part of a broader political campaign to deflect public attention away from the failures and scandals of Cyril Ramaphosa.
Faced with deepening economic collapse, unemployment, worsening poverty and unresolved corruption scandals, Ramaphosa’s defenders seek to manufacture constitutional outrage against Julius Malema and the EFF in order to silence the most consistent voice of opposition in South Africa.
The EFF will not be intimidated by court applications sponsored by liberal pressure groups acting in defence of political and economic elites. We will continue to expose corruption, challenge judicial inconsistency, and defend the constitutional right of South Africans to speak openly and critically about all institutions of power, including the judiciary itself.
The EFF has been accused of misusing funds by some critics.
Maple Destroyer
I took a trip to South Africa and met a Khoisan woman.
We really clicked.
Baked Zd
A buddy in Cape Town saw some dude cat calling a coloured woman with that kst kst kst sound, so she turns around and says \”What? You got a puncture in your face or something??\”