Newly-appointed Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Enver Surty warned on Monday against eroding the integrity of the judiciary.

Addressing the Commonwealth Magistrates and Judges Association's Conference, he said the event was being held against the backdrop of "interesting developments in our political landscape".

The independence of the judiciary and the rule of law had recently occupied a prominent space in the local and international media.

Debate and democracy

"While the debate is essentially beneficial to our fledgling democracy, we need to acknowledge that in some quarters it is fuelled by reckless or intemperate statements that may have the effect of undermining the integrity of the judiciary," he said.

Government had the responsibility to protect State institutions, including the judiciary, against unwarranted criticism.

"We should however be mindful of the fact that in a democratic society, decisions of the judiciary, as is the case with the conduct of other branches of government, will constantly be subjected to public scrutiny and criticism."

However, such criticism had to be rational and informed.

The late chief justice Ismael Mahomed observed, in 1999, that criticism which was persistently uninformed and unfair and which improperly impugned the integrity and the reputation of the judiciary, corroded public confidence in its legitimacy and might ultimately diminish its capacity to enforce its will in the defence of the citizen seeking redress against injustice.

Zuma and Motlanthe committed

"It is therefore important that we all conduct ourselves in a manner that will not erode the integrity of the judiciary in the eyes of the public," Surty said.

Both ANC President Jacob Zuma and President Kgalema Motlanthe had unequivocally pledged their commitment to the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.

"One of the challenges we face today is that of achieving a common understanding of the meaning of judicial independence and the boundaries of separation of powers, particularly between the judiciary and the other arms of government.

"It is a source of some comfort for us to note that we are not alone in our search for answers to these questions. This is a global quest," he said.

The jurists and legal minds gathered at the conference should thus consider a number of probing questions.

These included, how did the magistrate and the judge entrusted with the responsibility of controlling the exercise of power by other branches of State avoid encroaching into the arena of policy making, in particular within the peculiarity of the South African Constitution with a justifiable Bill of Rights?

How did the judiciary ensure that in interpreting the Bill of Rights which it should uphold in respect of every citizen, it did, itself not violate or was perceived to violate any of the rights in the Constitution?

"These are difficult and complex questions that require jurisprudential responses which I hope will help find permanent solutions to the constitutional challenges that continue to arise in democratic jurisdictions," Surty said.

Sapa