The debate regarding the appointment of South Africa’s next chief justice is necessary and should be encouraged. Everyone in South Africa should express their view as to who they believe should be the next chief justice or on the criteria that PresidentThe extent to which the debate will influence the president is not clear.
Section 174 of the constitution requires the president to make judicial appointments that reflect the racial and gender composition of South Africa. The president is also required to consult the chief justice and leaders of political parties represented in parliament when appointing judges. The Judicial Service Commission is constitutionally mandated to “prepare” a list of nominees with three names more than the number of appointments, from which the president will make his appointments ).
Ramaphosa is faced with the task of appointing the next chief justice following the retirement of the former chief justice,. To promote and encourage public participation, Ramaphosa decided to include the public in this process. Members of the public were required to nominate their preferred candidates to be “assessed and scrutinised” by a panel established by the president.
I should not, however, be misunderstood as arguing that she is not worthy or competent to be appointed chief justice. I am also of the view that out of all the nominated male candidates, Western Capealso does not stand a chance of being appointed, despite having all the attributes that are needed for the post. I have no doubt that Ramaphosa will try to avoid the noise that will likely erupt with the appointment of Hlophe.
Simply Junk!! Look at what Mkhwebane, in fact all woman political appointments and their track record. Have they been exceptional? Have they changed things for the better? We as South African want best people in best positions finished and klAar. Regardless of gender.
what's the difference if it's man or woman same destination moss,same rules to follow.
Obviously, you aren't suggesting that a woman for woman's sake because that already is prejudicially a template for entitlement mediocrity. Black for BEE sake hasn't done SA Inc any favours—only flops. Just bat your prejudice without psychological bullying
Let's see.
The moment any criteria other that competence is introduced, the appointee becomes, hopefully, the best of the rest, but will never be the best.
Maybe appoint on competence and not colour and or gender. That is why we are in shit as we are in this country
Simple someone deserving stop this nonsense of guilt tripping man, women have of chances to elect their own but what do they do? Someone willing enough to serve the country deserves to be in that sit
CJ is an important role. If the best person for the job is female then great. But it must go to whomever is best for for the job. End of story. Racialising and genderising appointmemts at crucial positions only leads to poor performance. Best candidate, no matter colour or gender
Haibo. Public protector a woman NDPP a woman Parliament chair a woman. Now evn chief justice you want to be a woman. No no no haibo. Sukaaa tshini
As a woman, I just want someone who is fit for office, a man or a woman. Deputy Chief Justice, Raymond Zondo is doing a good job in his position and he is a good candidate.
Swafana!!!!
Should it be the most competent person or should we pursue gender redress at all cost? Just my musings