Arms Deal Inquiry: Judges submit last-minute applications, delay case 

The hearing against judges Willie Seriti and Hendrick Musi to decide whether the Seriti commission failed to conduct a meaningful investigation into the 1999 arms deal was postponed indefinitely on Friday . 

The Judicial Conduct Committee (JCC) concluded after meeting on Friday to hear complaints against Seriti and Musi about their purported arms deal inquiry misconduct that the matter will only be heard after the Gauteng High Court addresses a constitutionality issue. 

This was after both Seriti and Musi filed a last-minute application to the court to challenge the constitutionality of the Judicial Service Commission Act. 

ALSO READ: Review of arms deal commission’s findings starts

The journey of Seriti commission complaints 

The high court in Pretoria set aside the findings of 2016’s Seriti commission looking into the controversial 1999 arms deal with costs in August 2019, following applications from Corruption Watch and the Right2Know Campaign to have the findings of the commission declared null and void.

The cost of the commission was reported in June last year as being almost R140 million.

Shadow World Investigations and Open Secrets then lodged a complaint with the JCC in August 2020 against Seriti and Musi over what the non-profit organisations described as their “failing to conduct a full and meaningful investigation” by the commission of inquiry.

ALSO READ: R140m Seriti commission’s arms deal findings set aside

In May, acting Chief Justice Judge Raymond Zondo told Open Secrets and Shadow World Investigations their complaint had sufficient merit to be referred to the JCC for hearing. 

The organisations said in a statement on Friday they believed the application brought by Seriti and Musi was “without merit”, and they intended to “oppose it vigorously”.

They also said they believed the application lodged by the judges was an attempt to delay the JCC’s proceedings, “so that their indefensible misconduct remains unpunished for as long as possible”.

Seriti and Musi’s application 

Open Secrets and Shadow World Investigations said in their joint statement that Seriti and Musi wanted an order declaring the definition of “judge” in section 7(g) of the Judicial Service Commission Act declared unconstitutional. 

ALSO READ: Will arms deal inquiry judges face impeachment?

They said Seriti and Musi argue the act “allows for judges who have retired to be found guilty of misconduct”, but that the Constitution defines a judge only as “a sitting judge and not a retired judge”. 

They labelled Seriti and Musi’s application “incorrect”, saying the system change they were calling for means retired judges cannot be held accountable for any gross negligence or misconduct they may have committed while they were active judges. 

“This case is ultimately about strengthening public trust in our judiciary. As civil society organisations we will continue to struggle for accountability and justice every step of the way. 

“No one should be above the law, even judges.”

Background reporting by Bernadette Wicks and News24 Wire. 

Compiled by Nica Richards