The sub judice rule is often used by politicians as a legal justification for their refusal to answer difficult questions, in Parliament and in public. It has also been relied upon by private people and by Parliament to block or stifle debates about important issues. But what does the rule actually say? In this article, we explain what the sub judice rule says and when the rule will apply. What is the sub judice rule? Sub judice roughly translates as “before a court” or “under a judge”.
For example, Barend van Niekerk, a Wits law professor, was convicted of contempt of court for breaching the sub judice rule after he publicly stated that judges should disregard evidence that may have been obtained through torture in an ongoing political trial under the Terrorism Act. The new test Fortunately, the Supreme Court of Appeal created a new test for sub judice in 2007, which is far more lenient and more consistent with the right to freedom of expression.