CHIEF JUSTICE NOMINEE DENIES HOMOPHOBIA
and the Constitutional Court
Chief Justice nominee Mogoeng Mogoeng has denied that he is homophibic and said that he regrets a dissenting ruling that made it appear that he is.
Justice Mogoeng was grilled on Saturday and Sunday during a public Judicial Services Commission interview on his suitability as a candidate.
A number of LGBTI and civil society groups have objected to his nomination and activists wearing t-shirts supporting LGBTI and women’s rights were present at the interview.
In the Le Roux v Dey case earlier this year, Mogoeng disagreed with a majority decision by fellow Constitutional Court judges that there is nothing wrong with being gay or lesbian and thus being depicted as gay is not grounds for defamation. He also did not explain his position in the judgment.
Activists see this as indication of his homophobia and conservative values, further reflected in his membership of the anti-gay Winners Chapel South Africa church.
“I would like to rebut any suggestion that I am insensitive to gender-based violence, that I am homophobic, that I have little or no regard for judicial ethics and that I do not subscribe to freedom of expression,” Mogoeng responded on Saturday.
He admitted that he had erred in not giving an explanation for his dissension in the Le Roux v Dey case and would have agreed with the other judges if he had more time to consider the matter.
He acknowledged that he has “fully embraced the Christian faith” but insisted that this would not affect his judgements as he is “mindful of the fact that our Constitution was not meant to benefit Christians to the exclusion of all other people who either belong to other faiths or do not subscribe to any religion at all”.
Mogoeng argued that the Winners Chapel church’s admonishment of homosexuality was shared by most Christian denominations and that this is not unique to it, nor is it the core basis of its beliefs.
He furthermore insisted that he was committed to upholding the values and human rights enshrined in the Constitution.
Mogoeng also defended his judgement in cases involving violence against women, saying that critics had picked just a few of these cases to slate him.
He said that his rulings in other similar cases, “clearly demonstrate that I am not insensitive and lenient to criminals when it comes to gender-based violence, as alleged.”
According to reports, following the two-day interview, the JSC voted to support Mogoeng as President’s Zuma’s candidate for Chief Justice, although this has not yet been confirmed.
In the position of Chief Justice of South Africa, Mogoeng would also be the head of the country’s Constitutional Court.
Religion is everywhere in SA politics today, and increasingly it is coming to influence those public institutions and servants who should serve the public interest dispassionately and without fear or favour. When those beliefs run against the Bill of Rights (such as judge Mogoengs views on homosexuality) the results can be profound and far reaching, and to the detriment of our democracy. You might recall Zumas 2006 pronouncement that same sex marriage is a disgrace to the nation and to God – is his nomination of Mogoeng a consequence of this belief? Even our elections – the pinnacle of democratic free choice and individual agency – seems to have been reduced to nothing more than an exercise in carrying out Gods will. Very little is written on this subject. Most people are too scared to cause offence. But the Bill of Right demands much more than that. The line between church and state needs to be fiercely guarded and, at the moment, it is being torn down. As a result, religious prejudice, inconsistent with the Constitution, has found a home at the highest levels of the government and God is being used to instil fear in those who do not support a particular political agenda, all of which is to the detriment of our democracy.
Lance,i would like to agree adn disagree with you. Mogoeng is upholdign the constitution and not eh Bible. U know as well as i do that Churches across the world are at crossroads regarding gay rights…..In Zumas case,i even voted for him knowign he would uphold the constitution and not his personal beliefs about gays….indid he has. Where am working ,my Bosses son is very gay,i know it and he also knows am gay,but he told me not to express myself as gay in the work environment…..i wont start making noise because i want to eb noted with a big mouth,i fully understand the society. I went to England early year,i thought those were democratic brothers olways telling us what to do to respect peoples rights….when i went to church one sunday….ofcourse i didnt care whoever was looking…but i could clearly see murmurs around me for being openly gay because of teh way i was dressed…..infact one woman called me on the side and told me of a gay church a short distance from where we were…..meaning,thy didnt feel confortable with me in their presence but would rather have me go to a gay church nearby. It was a big lesson for me indid….because whereas the constitution of GB allows freedom of gay and lesbians,people were not as free as we have olways been told. Bible against Constitution…….