Ten key things to come out of the JSC tribunal hearing into Judge President Selby Mbenenge

• The Judicial Service Commission referred Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge to a full tribunal after finding the complaint serious enough to amount to possible gross misconduct.
• The hearing focuses on WhatsApp chats, disputed explicit images and an alleged chambers incident, with both sides presenting conflicting accounts.
• The panel says only objectively proven sexual harassment, not assumptions or rank, can justify a gross misconduct finding.

The Judicial Service Commission tribunal found that the sexual harassment complaint against Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge meets the threshold for possible gross misconduct and must be heard by a full, formal tribunal rather than handled internally.

The case centres on WhatsApp exchanges, alleged explicit images and a disputed chambers incident. Judge President Mbenenge admits sending flirtatious messages but says they were consensual, while the complainant says some conduct was unwelcome. Both versions will be tested against records and expert evidence.

The panel said the outcome will depend on objective proof, credibility and the full context of the messages. Only proven sexual harassment, not assumptions or rank, can justify a gross misconduct finding.

Ten crucial things to come out of the hearing

1. The complaint established a prima facie case, meaning the allegations are serious enough that, if proven, they could amount to gross misconduct by Judge President Mbenenge.
2. The matter was escalated to a full tribunal of the Judicial Service Commission, with the panel saying it is too serious for an internal or informal process.
3. Judge President Mbenenge admitted sending flirtatious WhatsApp messages but rejected the claim that they were unwelcome or constituted harassment.
4. The complainant alleged she received explicit sexual images, while Judge President Mbenenge denied sending them, and expert evidence could not always conclusively trace their origin.
5. She reported a sexually suggestive chambers incident, which Judge President Mbenenge denied, relying on CCTV, security logs and movement records to dispute that version.
6. The tribunal found that both parties exchanged flirtatious and sometimes sexually suggestive messages, meaning the full context, not isolated texts, must be assessed.
7. The complainant acknowledged omitting some of her own suggestive messages from her complaint statements, which the panel said created an incomplete record at the outset.
8. Credibility issues arose around near-identical complaint statements, with the tribunal questioning how two versions were virtually word-for-word the same.
9. The complainant argued she participated out of fear linked to workplace power imbalance, while the tribunal said coercion cannot simply be presumed from seniority alone.
10. The panel said the decisive question is objective proof of sexual harassment, stressing that only proven harassment, not assumptions or awkward conduct, can justify a finding of gross misconduct.

ALSO READ: Support for Mengo after tribunal finds misconduct by Judge President Mbenenge

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.