Mthatha high court admin officials allegedly demanding bribes from attorneys

The Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) has remained mum on allegations that administrative officials in the Mthatha high court demand bribes of up to R15,000 from attorneys to perform routine but critical work in civil cases.

The officials work in administrative areas, including the registrar’s office, case flow management, motion court, filing and typing and are accused of soliciting bribes for tasks they must do and are already paid for.

The tasks include retrieving supposedly “missing” case files, for R2,000 per file, allocating court dates, for up to R15,000 per date, transcribing court orders, R5,000, and expediting taxation of legal costs, R15,000.

The allegations were first raised in an anonymous complaint submitted to court officials in December and corroborated in an investigation by the SA Accountability Journalism Project.

The letter was addressed to acting judge president of the Eastern Cape high court division, Zamani Nhlangulela, and then acting deputy judge president Bantubonke Tokota.

Five months after the allegations were first raised, there has been no indication what action has been taken by either the OCJ — the government department which provides administrative support to the courts and the judiciary, or chief justice Mandisa Maya.

More than 20 lawyers, speaking anonymously, alleged that corrupt practices in the court went back two decades and were an open secret.

One Mthatha advocate said attorneys instructing him sometimes complained they were unable to secure dates because of officials soliciting bribes.

Another advocate recalled the despair of a small-town attorney when he was informed that the case was not yet ready, and that they would need to seek out a later court date.

“Where will I get another R3,000 to pay for the allocation of the [new] date?” the advocate recalled the attorney asking.

Some attorneys said firms that probably paid bribes could be identified as they regularly and quickly received court dates and secured an advantage in getting cases enrolled.

This allegation is also contained in the anonymous letter of complaint, which claims that an official working in the court’s case flow management office would “favour certain firms ... based on their ability to pay ... That is why certain firms usually dominate”.

Attorneys at those firms acknowledged being aware of an alleged bribery racket but were unwilling to be named.

The civil cases brought to court by attorneys in Mthatha often involve litigants who are among the poorest or most vulnerable in the province.

“The rot in the system affects members of the public the most,” the advocate said.

An East London-based attorney agreed: “If one party can get a date so quickly, within a couple of months when everybody else must wait for years to get a date ... then that’s unfair, then justice is not equitable for everybody.”

The letter named nine officials accused of extorting bribes, including the court’s registrar.

One of the eight officials — a typist named alongside the registrar— has apparently resigned and could not be traced.

But reporters sent WhatsApps and emails to the seven other officials and asked for their responses to the allegations and to being named in the letter. None responded.

The registrar acknowledged the queries. She called a reporter to say she and her colleagues were advised not to speak to us and referred queries to the OCJ.

Spokesperson for the OCJ and the judiciary, Lindokuhle Nkomonde, said the OCJ had “zero tolerance for fraud and corruption” and that it treated complaints pertaining to these “with seriousness, urgency and sensitivity”.

He did not say, however, what Maya was doing in response to the complaint against the Mthatha officials.

The complaint letter was leaked to reporters by a judge.

• This investigation was produced by the SA Accountability Journalism Project, a project of the Henry Nxumalo Foundation funded by the EU.