Helen Suzman Foundation director Nicole Fritz on Wednesday expressed disappointment at the “degraded” process that was the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC’s) recent interviews for the Chief Justice position.

For the first time last week South Africans witnessed the process of interviewing the candidates for the country’s next Chief Justice, to replace Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng whose term came to an end in October last year.

Fritz says the foundation recognised that the path to this point for Justice Mandisa Maya in particular – as a woman in a notoriously sexist profession – must have been harder than for her male counterparts.

Commenting on the differential treatment given to the candidates in their questioning she questioned why Justice Maya should attract so many questions relating to gender, in an approach that seemed unquestionably patronising at times, making for a situation in which it was next to impossible to adequately or meaningfully compare the candidates.

Fritz said the South African public were spectacularly let down and subjected to a spectacle that was both irrational and unfair.

She added that in contravention of its own practice, and basic principles of justice, the JSC failed to notify Judge President Dunstan Mlambo ahead of time not only of the damning, but a potentially defamatory, line of questioning it intended pursuing.

She added that the line of questioning related to an entirely unsubstantiated rumour of sexual misconduct and was sustained for what would have been near half of the time originally allocated for Mlambo’s interview.

During Acting Chief Justice Raymond Zondo examination, the foundation says explicit political agendas were pursued.

“It is worth noting that towards the end of the interview of Acting Chief Justice Zondo, he became, it seemed, entirely superfluous to the interview; it being used instead by Julius Malema to wage a political fight with the Minister of Justice about his involvement in the appointment of acting justices to the Constitutional Court, “ explained Fritz.

She added that the Constitution affords the President the power to appoint the Chief Justice of the country, having consulted with the JSC and leaders of parties in the National Assembly.

“The debasement of the interview process, the abuse of the JSC’s powers and role, and the shameful conduct of certain JSC commissioners means that whoever assumes the post of Chief Justice would begin her or his tenure denied the full confidence of the public,” she concluded.