54 CASES SUBMITTED TO JUDICIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY

MBABANE – The Judicial Commission of Inquiry set to investigate alleged malpractice in the Office of the Master of the High Court has 54 cases on its lap so far.

The number of cases received by the commission was disclosed by its Secretary, Siphiwo Nyoni. It has been reliably gathered that among the 54 reported and filed complaints, they involve the  estates of the late prominent Lawyer Collin Ntiwane, late astute businessman Leo Bloza Maziya, who held the title in properties worth over E37 million and that of Pigg’s Peak businessman Calvin Ndlovu, the father of former minister Hlobisile Ndlovu. Last Wednesday, during the first sitting of the commission, an allegation was made that Chief Justice (CJ) Bheki Maphalala, told the daughter of a deceased businessman Sikhakhane Dlamini that when a wealthy person died, the master and her deputy had the tendency to keep the file.

Willingness

The number of cases to be heard by the commission is expected to rise to over 100, as more people have reportedly expressed their willingness and readiness to appear before the commission. It is expected to continue hearing submissions today. So far, two individuals appeared before the panel of the commission of inquiry, which is held at the Industrial Court of Appeal, housed at the FINCORP Building, along Gwamile Street. Thembi Dlamini was the first person to appear before the commission. She is the daughter of the late well-known Matsapha businessman Sikhakhane. Thembi, among other allegations, told the commission that her father’s estate was being looted at the Master’s Office. The second woman to appear before the commission was Sibongile Dlamini, who is the widow of Hamilton Nxumalo, who was employed at Gwamile Voctim.

She accused the master of continuing to distribute her husband’s estate despite a pending court case in which she is challenging her purported divorce decree, which she wants to be nullified. The commission sits on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays. Thursdays and Fridays are reserved to consider written submissions as well as documents presented by those who appeared before it for oral evidence. The commission receives both written and oral submissions. It was established by CJ Maphalala and its mandate is to investigate allegations of impropriety, maladministration, abuse of power and incidental matters at the Master’s Office. Members of the panel are Judge Majahenkhaba Dlamini (Chairperson), Judge Mzwandile Fakudze, Judge President Sifiso Nsibande, Judge Maxine Langwenya and Judge Lorraine Hlophe.

Meanwhile, today, the commission will be continuing with its sitting, which will be the second, against the backdrop of a complaint filed by the Law Society of Eswatini (LSE) to the CJ, wherein it presented 22 reasons why he should stop the commission. In the correspondence, the law society brought it to the attention of the CJ that the legal authority to establish a commission into the Master’s Office vested in the minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, being the minister with the responsibility of the Judiciary and the administration of estates.

Minister

According to the LSE, the responsibility was assigned to the minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs by His Majesty the King, in terms of Legal Notice No.189 of 2015, titled ‘Assignment of Responsibilities to Ministers’. The lawyers highlighted that in doing so, the King was exercising powers conferred on him by Section 70 of the Constitution. Section 70 states that; “ The King may, after consultation with the prime minister, assign to the prime minister or any other minister responsibility for the conduct of any business of the government, including the administration of any department of government.” The lawyers further cautioned the CJ against allegedly playing with public emotions on a matter of public importance.

SIMILAR PROBE SET UP BY EXECUTIVE ARM IN SA

MBABANE –   A similar probe has been set up in South Africa, but the difference is that theirs had been put in place by the Executive arm of government.

The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa states: “The president is responsible for appointing commissions of inquiry. It was reported that this investigation was necessitated by several allegations of maladministration and corruption, wherein it is alleged that an official in the Master’s Office amassed R1.7 million through fraudulent activities. It was recently reported that Offices of the Master of the High Court in the neighbouring country had to close as part of the investigation into allegations of maladministration, corruption and fraud.
The closure of the offices was announced by that country’s Justice Minister Ronald Lamola, after a search and seizure operation that was conducted by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) at the Master’s Office in Johannesburg.

According to the Department of Justice, the investigation will look into maladministration in relation to the estates of deceased and insolvent persons, as well as the protection and administration of the funds of minors, contractually incapacitated and undetermined and absent heirs, which have been paid into the Guardian’s Fund. In the Kingdom of Eswatini, the Judicial Commission of Inquiry to investigate the allegations of impropriety, maladministration, abuse of power and incidental matters at the Master’s Office has been put in place by Chief Justice (CJ) Bheki Maphalala.

Appointment

The CJ said the appointment of the commission was in terms of Section 139(5) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Eswatini.  Section 139(5) provides that; “Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the chief justice is the head of the Judiciary and is responsible for the administration and supervision of the Judiciary.” Lawyers, however, are of the view that the powers to appoint the commission are vested in the Executive arm of government, not the CJ. The lawyers alleged that by appointing the commission, the CJ acted beyond his legal authority or power, which could not be derived from Section 139(5) of the Constitution. The learned friends based their argument on Section 3 of the Commission of Enquiry Act of 1963. They argued that Section 3 of the Commissions of Enquiries Act provides that the function of appointing a commission of inquiry vests in the Executive arm of government.

Section 3 ( 1) provides that: Any minister may, by notice in the gazette, issue a commission appointing one or more commissioners and may therein provide that one or more members shall constitute a quorum for the purposes of the enquiry. It further stipulates that any minister may, in appropriate circumstances and for a specific purpose and with the approval of Cabinet, appoint, by notice published in a gazette, a committee on such terms and conditions to carry out specific work or task, as the case may be.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: