Capacity: Judge
Further appointments: N/A
First appointed as a judge: February 2015
Gender: Female
Ethnicity: African
Date of Birth: January 1970
Qualifications: B.Proc (1992) (University of Transke), Certificate in Conflict Management (1994) (Electoral Institute of South Africa) and LLM (2007) (Unisa)
Key judgments:
- Hlakanyane v Hlakanyane and Others (1670/2022) [2023] ZAECMHC 35 (4 July 2023)
- Standard Bank v Mbane (2015) ZAEC MHL 53 (23 April 2015)
- S v Singana (CA&R 54/2015) [2015] ZAECPEHC 9 (4 March 2015)
- M v S (CA&R311/2015) [2016] ZAECGHC 29 (6 May 2016)
- Stephen v Member of the Executive Council for Local Government And Traditional Affairs and Others (995/2013) [2014] ZAECMHC 1; [2014] 2 All SA 116 (ECM) (30 January 2014)
Candidate Bio | Updated September 2025:
Born in Nqamakwe Eastern Cape, in 1970, Judge Buyiswa Majiki holds a B.Proc, an LLM and a certificate in conflict management.
Before her elevation to the bench, she had 17 years of experience as an attorney, within her own firm – Majiki and Vuba Attorneys, in Butterworth, Eastern Cape
She has had various acting stints as a Judge in Bisho in 2008, 2011, and 2012. Judge Majiki has also acted as a judge in the North Gauteng High Court in March 2016, and was also appointed as a member of the Electoral Court in 2011. She is currently a Judge at the Eastern Cape High Court in Mthatha, where she also took on the role of the Acting Deputy Judge President from October 2024 – November 2024.
Judge Majiki has been dedicated to gender transformation, and community development through her membership in various associations. She was one of the founding members of SAWLA and was its first president elected in 2007, and continues as a training legal practitioner. She was also a founding member of the UNITRA Women’s Association, the Ubaqa Legal Society in Durban, the Butterworth Region Attorneys Association, a member of the Cape Law Society, the National Gender Coordinator of NADEL, a member of the SA Women Lawyers Interim Steering Committee, a member of the SACIAWJ.
In addition to her extensive membership in various organisations, she has also participated in collaborative programs with the Walter Susulu University being involved in the 2023 Celebration of 100 years of women lawyers; entry in the legal profession, and the Moot Court in 2024.
As a High Court judge, she has written extensively around family law. in Hlakanyana v Hlakanyana she wrote on the issue of spouses who enter marriages in community of property without entering into antenuptial contracts. Even though it was overturned by the Supreme Court in a split judgement, the debate was further continued by the SCA’s minority judgement in in LH v ZH 2022 (1) SA 384 SCA.
In S v Singana she dealt with a matter concerning the intention of the legislature to safeguard children, who are in conflict with the law, and that are to be detained as a measure of last resort. The judgment confirmed that a wholly suspended imprisonment sentence for a child is automatically reviewable under Chapter 30 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 and upheld the proceedings and sentence as in accordance with justice.
Majiki has previously served as an acting deputy judge president in the division. She was nominated for this position by the South African Women Lawyers Association where she was founding member and served as its first national president.
Amongst her outstanding judgments is one from October 2024 which she indicated that she has written to the Judge President to explain the reasons behind the delay.
Interestingly, Majiki has been very active in partisan politics. She was a SANSCO member from 1988-1991, a part-time councillor in the Amathole District Municipality, previously served as a branch secretary of the African National Congress (2000-2012), and she was a member of the South African Communist Party (2002 – 2008). She has also played an active role in the leadership of her church, Assemblies of God – Back to God.
October 2025 Interview
Interview Synopsis
Judge Buyiswa Majiki was the first candidate to be interviewed on Monday, 13 October, for the position of Deputy Judge President of the Eastern Cape High Court.
The interview began with an acknowledgement from the Chief Justice that she has a personal relationship with Judge Majiki, whom she referred to as one of her “young sisters in the judiciary”. The discussion started with Judge Majiki’s work history, which includes various roles such as counsellor and positions with the Independent Electoral Commission. In this initial portion of the interview, Judge Majiki proposed several changes she would implement if appointed Deputy Judge President — some aimed at improving the functioning of the Mthatha High Court, described as being in shambles, and others at strengthening the judiciary more broadly.
Her proposed reforms for the Mthatha High Court included bringing in more judges to assist with caseloads, continuing to implement the new Court Online system, and reviewing positions such as Court Manager to improve synergy and communication across departments. Chief Justice Maya asked why, if Judge Majiki was so passionate about these reforms, she had not already begun implementing them as a judge whose primary seat is in Mthatha. The issues facing the Mthatha court arose in the interviews of all three candidates vying for the position, but with Judge Majiki being the only one based there, she was able to provide insight into some of the structural and systemic challenges that require overhaul, such as the maintenance of certain rolls.
Judge Majiki also advocated for the creation and implementation of judicial wellness programmes, highlighting the physical and mental toll placed on judges handling multiple long-running cases, particularly those involving graphic or distressing content. She further expressed strong support for the new anti-sexual harassment policy and spoke at length about the need to be more proactive in recruiting and mentoring young women in the profession.
Concerns were raised about several objections to her appointment, stemming from allegations that she had either delayed judgments unjustifiably or provided inaccurate explanations for such delays. Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi SC cited one case in which, according to Judge Majiki’s account, a judgment was delayed for several months because her registrar was ill, when in fact the registrar had returned to the office three months before the documentation was placed before the judge. Judge Majiki acknowledged that this must have been an error on her part, though the commissioner appeared unsatisfied with her explanation.