Suspended Judge ’Maseforo Mahase Faces Early Setback in Bid to Overturn Suspension

Suspended High Court Judge ’Maseforo Mahase has suffered an early setback in her attempt to challenge her suspension. The High Court declined to treat her constitutional application as urgent and struck it off the urgent roll on Monday. Justice Sekake Malebanye ruled that there was no justification to fast track the matter.

Justice Mahase was suspended on 4 November 2025. She approached the court seeking to stop what she calls an unlawful and unconstitutional suspension. Her suspension followed the appointment of a three member tribunal on 13 October 2025. The tribunal is chaired by Justice Mankhambira Charles Chinganyi Mkandawire of Malawi, with Justice Sylvester Salufi Mainga from Namibia and Justice David Mangota from Zimbabwe as members.

Her lawyer, Advocate Katiso Nhlapo, argued that the matter should be heard urgently. He said the application raises constitutional issues central to the rule of law. He told the court that the legality of suspending or removing a High Court judge requires swift attention. He warned that delays could harm the Constitution and undermine public confidence in the judiciary.

Respondents include Chief Justice Sakoane Sakoane, His Majesty King Letsie III, Justices Mkandawire, Mainga and Mangota, the Judicial Service Commission and Attorney General Rapelang Motsieloa.

Advocate Rudie Cronje, representing the respondents, opposed the urgency. He said they had only received the papers last Thursday and needed time to consult and prepare. He argued that the matter was not urgent and that the application had been rushed without justification. He added that the issues raised were procedural rather than constitutional.

When both sides failed to agree on urgency, Justice Malebanye stood the matter down to allow further consultation. By midday the parties reported that they could not reach consensus, except on the point that constitutional matters are normally handled expeditiously.

In delivering his ruling, Justice Malebanye said the application did not meet the threshold for abridged timelines. He noted that the parties could not agree on deadlines for filing responses. He added that the date proposed by Advocate Cronje for the answering affidavit indicated that the matter was not urgent. He ruled that the application be struck off the roll of urgent matters.

The case will now follow normal court procedures and is likely to be heard next year.

In her application, Justice Mahase accuses the Chief Justice of suspending her without giving her a hearing. She says she would have presented affidavits from Advocates Makara and Fusi Sehapi to show that the cases in question were allocated to her through standard procedures. She argues that denying her an opportunity to respond violated the right to be heard, a key principle of administrative justice.

The tribunal will investigate allegations of misconduct. These include claims that she allocated cases to herself despite having an interest in them and delayed delivery of judgments beyond the 90 day limit.

Her suspension comes after months of tension with the Chief Justice. In June, the Chief Justice accused her of presiding over two urgent matters without proper allocation in violation of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2024. He described her conduct as unbecoming of judicial standards. Justice Mahase denied wrongdoing and said she relied on information from her clerk, who allegedly told her the cases had been allocated to her.

In a letter dated 17 June 2025, the Chief Justice rejected her explanation. He questioned why a judge would seek clarification from administrative staff about a matter under their authority. He said her response was not persuasive and referred the matter for deeper inquiry under Section 121(5) of the Constitution.

The case now moves into regular court processes, setting the stage for a protracted legal battle over judicial conduct and constitutional procedure.