Didiza’s Lawyers Make Their Position Clear on Malema’s Future in the JSC as Court Hears Challenge

Legal representatives of National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza have told the Western Cape High Court that she does not have the legal authority to initiate proceedings aimed at removing or replacing Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema from the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

The argument was presented on Wednesday, 11 November 2026, during a court hearing involving an application brought by the Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF), which wants Parliament to reconsider Malema’s suitability to serve on the judicial body.

According to SABC News, Advocate Kameel Premhid, representing Didiza, argued that the Speaker’s powers are limited by the Constitution and the rules governing Parliament.

He maintained that Didiza cannot simply introduce a process to remove a National Assembly representative from the JSC without a specific legal provision granting her such authority.

Premhid explained that the Speaker operates within the boundaries of parliamentary legislation and established procedures. He further argued that if the Helen Suzman Foundation believes the existing parliamentary rules are inadequate, it should challenge those rules through the appropriate legal process.

The legal challenge centres on Didiza’s decision in April 2026 not to ensure that the National Assembly considered Malema’s continued suitability to serve on the JSC.

The Helen Suzman Foundation argues that Malema’s public statements and repeated criticism of judicial officers over several years raise concerns about his position on a body responsible for interviewing and recommending candidates for judicial appointments.

The organisation believes Parliament has a responsibility to examine whether Malema’s conduct is consistent with the standards expected of someone serving on the commission.

However, Malema has opposed the application, maintaining that his comments about the judiciary fall within his constitutional right to freedom of expression and political speech.

His legal representatives have also argued that the foundation’s application seeks extraordinary intervention in Parliament’s constitutional responsibilities.

The case has attracted considerable attention because the JSC plays an important role in South Africa’s judicial system. It is responsible for interviewing candidates and making recommendations concerning appointments to the country’s superior courts.

The proceedings also raise important constitutional questions about the powers of the National Assembly, the responsibilities of its Speaker and the circumstances under which parliamentary representatives can be reconsidered for JSC membership.

A full bench of the Western Cape High Court heard the arguments from the different parties. The court reserved judgment after hearing the matter.

For now, Malema’s position on the commission remains unchanged, with the final outcome depending on the court’s forthcoming decision.

The ruling could have implications for how Parliament handles questions concerning the suitability and continued appointment of its representatives to the JSC.

https://x.com/centralnewsza/status/2120825825054343658?a=K3vqFsAY-L6f8Jsykqs&s=19

Gabirelagbo feedback-opera-news-app@opera.com