By Tefo Tefo
MASERU — Justice Michael Ramodibedi now anxiously awaits his fate after the Court of Appeal on Monday announced it would be making its ruling in due course.
The Appeal Court president is challenging government’s decision to suspend him while it institutes impeachment-proceedings against him.
Ramodibedi’s argument, as presented before court by his South African lawyer, Peter Hodes, was Prime Minister Thomas Thabane did not afford him a hearing before advising the King last year to set up a tribunal to investigate allegations of misconduct against him.
“Before considering the facts, one must look at the law first. In this case, we should look at the constitution, which provides for a fair hearing before any decision that is likely to have adverse effects on an individual, is made.
“In this country, a person is entitled to be heard regardless of whether the decision involves an administrative issue or any other matter.
“The test here is whether there was a hearing before representation was made to the King or not. And our submission is there was no hearing and as I said, the right to be heard should have been exercised prior to the first respondent’s (Thabane’s) representation to the King to appoint a tribunal,” Hodes said.
Hodes further criticised Thabane for being both the aggrieved party and the one making decisions on what should be done against Ramodibedi.
“The fact that the Prime Minister is also the complainant in the allegations levelled against the appellant (Ramodibedi) makes things even worse,” he charged.
However, the lawyer arguing on behalf of government, Senior Counsel Gilbert Marcus from South Africa, said Ramodibedi was not entitled to a hearing at the stage of making representation to the King for the establishment of the tribunal.
“That was the preliminary stage of the course of events; it did not affect the right to be heard,” Marcus said.
He also said even if the court ruled in favour of Ramodibedi, the judgement would not have much bearing on the case because the Court of Appeal president was only looking at the technicalities of the process.
“No practical purpose would be served if this court doesn’t agree with what I have said; no practical outcome would come from this case if we lose. Let the tribunal be set so that he can make his representation,” Marcus said, adding it was not proper for Ramodibedi to be accorded special treatment simply because of his status.
Marcus was responding to an argument by Hodes that his client should have been heard before the King was advised to set up the tribunal because he is a top judicial officer.
“Judges do not enjoy special treatment,” Marcus said.
However the presiding judge, Justice Fritz Brand from South Africa, said the court would “take time to deliver judgment in this matter”.
Meanwhile, other local lawyers who assisted Hodes were King’s Counsel Salemane Phafane, Sakoane Sakoane and Zwelakhe Mda, while Advocate Siphosihle Mdhluli was assisting Marcus on behalf of the government.
