Former UJ lecturer wants Judge Mudau to be probed for misconduct

Students on the University of Johannesburg campus. Picture: Supplied

Students on the University of Johannesburg campus. Picture: Supplied

Published Oct 19, 2022

Share

Johannesburg - Former University of Johannesburg lecturer Lyness Matizirofa wants Judge Phanuel Mudau to be investigated for allegedly using non-existent facts in her unfair dismissal case against the institution.

This comes after Mudau ruled in favour of the university in August when Matizirofa challenged her dismissal in the South Gauteng High Court.

She said Mudau relied on non-existent information to rule against her. Matizirofa also said Mudau violated the Constitution and the code of judicial conduct.

She said the use of non-existent facts led to a judgement based on the wrong narrative, resulting in incorrect findings.

Matizirofa, who was a lecturer in the UJ statistics department, was axed for poor performance and gross dishonesty in February 2020. She said these were trumped-up charges.

Matizirofa, who originates from Zimbabwe, said she had been unfairly dismissed. She said her dismissal was based on xenophobia and the fact that she has a disability.

She has made a complaint to Judge President Dunstan Mlambo and Deputy Judge President Roland Terence Sutherland. The complaint was lodged through her lawyers, Machaba Attorneys.

Matizirofa said she was inspired to complain about Mudau after Judge Bashier Vally issued an apology for using non-existent evidence in his judgment in favour of Eskom in a controversial fuel oil case. She said this reasoning should also apply in her case. She said using non-existent evidence constituted gross bias and tainted a judge as lacking impartiality.

Following a UJ internal hearing, she was charged with poor performance and misconduct. The hearing was chaired by CCMA commissioner Keheditse Masege, who had been hired as an independent chairperson.

After delivering her ruling, which saw the Matizirofa’s contract being terminated, Masege was accused of merely using the CCMA template in reaching the outcome.

The CCMA investigated the matter and found that Masege had misconducted herself. She was suspended.

In her 36-page affidavit, Matizirofa had said she had instructed her legal team to serve a letter of demand on UJ and Professor Tshilidzi Marwala about her “unlawful” dismissal.

She said she had made it clear that she would advise UN University about the kind of person the institution had employed when it hired Marwala.

Matizirofa said Marwala did not like her because she was a foreigner. He has been appointed as the rector of UNU and is expected to begin his term there in March 2023.

UJ and Marwala contended that this statement was designed to cause irreparable harm to their good names and reputations.

In his judgment, Mudau said Matizirofa had no right to publish, disclose, and disseminate to other parties, including UNU, incorrect and injurious statements. He said this amounted to defamation in respect of both UJ and Marwala.

Matizirofa said no such defamatory information had been communicated, either expressly or impliedly.

“The use of non-existent information is gross bias made or calculated to reflect as if (I) and my legal team deliberately intended to impugn the integrity and good names of the applicants (UJ and Marwala),” she said.

She added that Mudau had again incorporated non-existent information into his judgment when he had said that Advocate MacGregor Kufa, who also represented her, defamed the university and Marwala.

Matizirofa said that, if Mudau’s judgment had not contained these non-existent facts, it would have been handed down in her favour.

She said Mudau had violated the code of judicial conduct, as he had failed to pay special attention to the right to equality before the law. She added that Mudau had also failed to give special attention to the right to equal protection.

“In the circumstances, I humbly request my complaint to be investigated.”

On Friday, Ndivhuwo Tshubwana, a secretary for the Judicial Service Commission, confirmed that the commission had received Matizirofa’s complaint. Tshubwana said the complaint would be forwarded to the judicial conduct committee for consideration.

Sutherland refused to comment, saying the matter was before the Gauteng High Court.