MEMORANDUM
ON THE OBJECTS OF THE JUDICIAL SERVICE COMMISSION AMENDMENT BILL, 2007
1. BACKGROUND
The
Bill emanates from the Judicial Officers Amendment Bill [B 72—2001], that was introduced into Parliament
in 2001. It constitutes a redraft, by the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional
Development (National Assembly), in terms of National Assembly Rule 249(2)(g), of those various
provisions originally proposed in the Judicial Officers Amendment Bill [B
72─2001] pertaining to judicial conduct and complaints about judges.
2. OBJECTS
OF BILL
The
principal objects of the Bill are to amend the Judicial Service Commission Act,
1994 (Act No. 9 of 1994)—
(a) so
as to establish a Judicial Conduct Committee to receive and deal with
complaints about judges;
(b) to
provide that a judge may not hold any other office of profit or receive payment
for any service that is not payable to him or her in his or her capacity as a
judge, subject to certain exceptions;
(c) to
provide for a Code of Judicial Conduct which serves as the prevailing standard
of judicial conduct which judges must adhere to;
(d) to
provide for the establishment and maintenance of a register of judges’
registrable interests;
(e) to
provide for procedures for dealing with complaints about judges;
(f) to
provide for the establishment of Judicial Conduct Tribunals to inquire into and
report on allegations of incapacity, gross incompetence or gross misconduct
against judges; and
(g) to
provide for matters connected therewith.
3. CONSULTATION
The
Portfolio Committee has been engaged with the redrafting of the Bill for a
considerable period and an earlier version thereof formed part of a package of
legislation on the transformation of the judiciary that was discussed at the
Colloquium hosted by the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development during
2005. Following further consultation
with role-players, certain changes were effected to the Bill whereupon the Portfolio
Committee resumed its formal deliberations on a revised version of the Bill
during 2007. The Portfolio Committee
invited public comment on the Bill and held public hearings, during which a
number of interested parties made submissions to the Portfolio Committee.
4. IMPLICATIONS FOR PROVINCES
None.
5. FINANCIAL
Financial
implication should result from the administrative infrastructure that needs to
be developed in respect of the Judicial Service Commission and the Registrar of
Judges' Registrable Interests. Such
implications will be dealt with in the Department's allocated budgetary
framework.
6. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE
The
Judicial Officers Amendment Bill [B 72—2001] was classified as a Bill that must
be dealt with in terms of section 75 of the Constitution of the