The October sitting of the Judicial Service Commission
Twenty-two vacancies, a shortened sitting, and what the lower courts should still notice.
The October sitting. The lower courts live with the appointments that follow.
“Appointments must be fit and proper, and the judiciary must reflect the country it serves.” Constitution, section 174
Chief Justice Mandisa Maya is leading the October 2026 sitting. The Commission is interviewing for 22 posts in the superior courts, including three vacancies at the Supreme Court of Appeal. The candidate list for the Appeal Court has included Gerald Bloem J, Busisiwe Masipa J, Esther Steyn J, Ingrid Opperman J and Deputy Judge President Violet Phatshoane. Delayed judgments at the Appeal Court have been publicly identified as a reason for filling those posts without further loss of time.
Two features concern the lower courts even though the posts are superior-court posts. The first is the path from acting appointment to permanent appointment, and the
standard by which temperament, productivity and integrity are tested in public. The second is the open discussion of sexual harassment. Buyiswa Majiki J is reported to have told the Commission of a reluctance, in the Eastern Cape, to report such conduct. A lower court cannot treat that as a problem of another division. Heads of court should know the reporting line, protect a complainant from informal reprisal, and keep the disciplinary process separate from the roll.
Section 174 of the Constitution requires that the judiciary reflect the racial and gender composition of South Africa, and that appointees be fit and proper. Those two requirements are not alternatives. The Alliance does not, in this edition, comment on any candidate.
A note from Neelan Karikan. We note, with respect, that an unfilled post and an unsettled procedure both weigh on the courts that must live with the result. The Alliance does not comment on any candidate.