JOHANNESBURG, South Africa – Embattled Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge took the stand on Monday before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal, firmly denying key allegations of sexual harassment made against him and challenging the idea that class should dictate personal relationships.
Testifying at the Sandton hearings, Mbenenge addressed the tribunal’s ongoing probe into claims that he made persistent and unwanted sexual advances toward Andiswa Mengo, a high court secretary, between 2021 and 2022.
While the judge president acknowledged a desire to pursue a romantic relationship with Mengo, he denied sending her sexually explicit material, including images of male genitalia, and refuted allegations that he attempted to expose himself to her in his chambers in November 2022.
Mbenenge Pushes Back on Class and Power Dynamic Claims
During the hearing, Mbenenge faced questions about whether his position as a senior judicial officer made it inherently inappropriate to seek a relationship with someone in a junior role, especially within the same work environment.
Expert witnesses previously testified that the imbalance of power between Mbenenge and Mengo created an environment where Mengo would have found it difficult to reject his advances. Their argument emphasized that individuals in positions of authority, such as judges, should not initiate romantic relationships with subordinates due to ethical concerns and the potential for coercion.
However, Mbenenge pushed back against this argument, particularly the suggestion that a judge president should only engage in romantic relationships with individuals of equal social or professional standing.
“This thing about class distinction during this age and era is something that I look down upon,” Mbenenge told the tribunal, echoing a broader critique of what he sees as outdated societal norms. “I don’t believe that a JP, when it comes to engaging in whatever relationship, they are confined to persons of the same class. They are human beings. I know of judges who married their secretaries in this country. Heavens did not fall.”
Advocate Muzi Sikhakhane, representing Mbenenge, questioned his client during the proceedings, prompting him to reflect on the ethical expectations of someone holding a judicial office.
“What is your response to the theory that because you are a judge president, you should not seek to have any romantic engagement with someone below your class?” Sikhakhane asked.
Mbenenge reiterated his stance against class-based restrictions and insisted that the allegations against him were being overblown and taken out of context.
According to his testimony, while he did express interest in Mengo, it was never his intention to coerce or intimidate her, and any interaction between them was “consensual in tone,” even if it did not ultimately develop into a relationship.
So far, the tribunal has heard contradictory accounts from both parties. Mengo, who has already testified, painted a picture of a toxic work environment, where she felt pressured and fearful of the consequences of rejecting advances from one of the most powerful figures in the provincial judiciary.
Supporters of Mengo argue that the incident reflects a broader pattern of gender-based misconduct in professional settings, especially in institutions like the judiciary that command immense authority and public trust.
Meanwhile, Mbenenge’s defense has centered around the lack of evidence supporting the most serious claims, and his assertion that the relationship never crossed ethical or professional boundaries in a coercive way.
The case against Mbenenge raises significant questions about the ethical responsibilities of judicial officers, particularly those in senior leadership positions. If found guilty, the consequences could include disciplinary action, possible impeachment, or removal from office—all of which would mark a historic moment in South Africa’s judicial oversight process.
Legal experts warn that the outcome of the case could set an important precedent for how allegations of sexual misconduct within the judiciary are handled, especially in terms of power dynamics and consent.
“There’s a fine line between personal freedoms and professional ethics, especially when you’re dealing with people in powerful public roles,” said Professor Nomsa Dlamini, a legal ethics scholar. “Judge President Mbenenge’s testimony may be his truth, but the tribunal will need to decide whether his actions, regardless of intent, violated the ethical code expected of someone in his position.”
As the Judicial Conduct Tribunal continues its inquiry, the case of Judge President Selby Mbenenge serves as a critical test of judicial accountability and institutional trust in South Africa. The tribunal’s eventual findings will not only determine Mbenenge’s professional future but may also influence how misconduct cases are investigated and adjudicated in the judiciary going forward.
For now, Mbenenge maintains his innocence, defending both his character and his conduct. Whether the tribunal accepts his explanation—or finds fault in his actions—will have lasting implications far beyond this individual case.
Source- EWN
