Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright in all material published in PER/PELJ vests in the author, provided that authors grant, by submission of their contributions, permission that their contributions may be shared and adapted without restriction. An author furthermore agrees that the same contribution may not be published elsewhere without the written permission of the editor.
Anyone gaining access, electronically or otherwise, to a contribution to PER, may quote from such contribution, use the intellectual content thereof, share and adapt it, but subject to the following conditions:
you must give appropriate credit, provide a link and indicate if changes were made; and
the copyright of the author(s) may not be infringed in any way.
Main Article Content
The Unconstitutional Practices of the Judicial Service Commission under the Guise of Judicial Transformation: <i>Cape Bar Council v Judicial Service Commission</i> [2012] 2 ALL 143 (WCC)
Abstract
This contribution aims to point out valuable lessons from the shortcomings of the Judicial Service Commission as highlighted in the case of The Cape Bar Council v The Judicial Service Commission. The case involved the failure by the Judicial Service Commission to fill vacancies at the Western Cape High Court despite there being highly eligible candidates available for appointment. The judgment serves as a reminder to the Judicial Service Commission that as a public functionary it is subject to the rule of law and to the constitutional principles of accountability and transparency. Public functionaries are further reminded that they are subject to constitutional control. Such control is essential in ensuring that any abuse of power does not take place.
Keywords: Judicial recommendations, rule of law, accountability, transparency, public functionaries, rationality, legality, just administrative action, arbitrariness
