Editorial

Judicial Independence must be respected

The arms of government are tentacles of one body that serve the interests of the state.
 
The arms of government are tentacles of one body that serve the interests of the state.

For instance, the Executive and Judiciary are complementing arms of government that must mutually respect each other’s functions. This week at the funeral of one Pitseng Gaoberekwe, President Duma Boko emphatically lashed out at the Judiciary, threatening to use his executive powers to oust some judges.

The Judiciary as an arm of government is responsible for interpreting and enforcing the laws of the land. Their lordships are yoked with the heavy burden of executing this lofty mandate and serving justice in a way they can best interpret the law.

The leading framework governing the decisions of their lordships is the laws of the land, created by Parliament. It is therefore unwise for the first citizen to threaten to remove judges who serve according to the law made by Parliament. Judges because of the nature of their job are granted security of tenure to protect them from being victimised because of the decisions they make.

The President’s pronouncements threaten both the security of tenure and independence of the Judiciary in its mandate of hearing prayers and presiding over cases with free will. As a student of the noble profession himself, one would expect that the President is best suited to understand the parameters he must abide by in using his executive powers to address his frustrations.

During his days as a practicing human rights lawyer, Boko had his tussles with the courts. Representing minorities has left him as a spirited advocate of minority groups. But he now wears the coat of the state, not that of the law. In opining his posture and stance on the reforms that must be made to the courts, Boko should engage existing structures and bodies such as law society to seek redress and remedies to his frustrations.

Reforms to the Judiciary must not bear the scent of vindictiveness for former wrongs. The sad truth will always be that their lordships’ decisions are perceived to be made at what they deem to be the best interpretation of the law and they do not serve the interest of any ruling government but in the best interest of the principles of the law.

Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules. They apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire.– John Roberts