Judge President Cagney Musi

Capacity: Judge President
Appointed: December 2018
Previously: Deputy Judge President (Free State High Court), Jan 2017 – Nov 2018
Appointed as judge: 2005 (Free State High Court)
Gender: Man
Ethnicity: Coloured
Date of Birth: November 1962
Qualifications: Dip. Iuris (1985), BA (1988), LLB (1991), BA (Hons) (1993), LLM (1995)

Key judgments:

Candidate Biography (updated May 2023):

Judge President Cagney Musi currently serves as Judge President of the Free State High Court. One of three senior judges nominated for Deputy Chief Justice in 2025, Musi is a man of many firsts:

In 2005, he became one of the first magistrates appointed as a High Court judge;
In 2017, he became the first ex-magistrate to be appointed Deputy Judge President;
In late 2018, he became the first ex-magistrate to be appointed Judge President of a High Court division.

Should he be appointed Deputy Chief Justice, he would again make history as the first ex-magistrate to serve in that role.

This may seem mundane, but it matters. Until the advent of democracy, it was almost unthinkable for a magistrate to rise through the ranks to become the second-highest judicial officer in the country — ironic, considering that magistrates often adjudicate complex legal disputes.

It’s also historically significant for most South Africans. Under apartheid, Black legal professionals — no matter how skilled — were excluded from many areas of legal practice. Most could work only in criminal, family, and labour law, or in the state as interpreters, prosecutors, and magistrates. Many of South Africa’s Black judges since 1994 have walked this path — Musi included — though he has arguably broken the mould.

After obtaining a Diploma Iuris in 1985, Musi worked as a public prosecutor in the district court. While working full-time, he completed a BA in 1988 and an LLB in 1991, and was promoted to Regional Court Control Prosecutor. In 1992, he was appointed as a magistrate. He continued to study while working, earning a BA Honours in Public Administration (1993) from the University of the Western Cape, and an LLM in Labour Law (1995) from the University of Cape Town.

At the time, magistrates handled only criminal matters, but Musi was among the few to break that mould, gaining experience in civil and family law. He served as a district magistrate (1992–1997) and a regional magistrate (1997–2004), while also completing social context training with the Law, Race and Gender Unit at UCT (1995–2000).

Appointed to the Free State High Court bench in 2005, Musi has now served as a judicial officer for over 30 years — nearly half his life — bringing a unique, bottom-up perspective to judicial leadership.

Fluent in Afrikaans and Sesotho, Musi adapted quickly to the Free State’s then largely Afrikaans-speaking bench after relocating from his hometown of Cape Town. He served as a puisne judge (2005–2017), Deputy Judge President (2017–2018), and has been Judge President since 2018. He’s also joked that Bloemfontein’s icy winters were a welcome change from the Cape’s storms.

Musi’s primary field of expertise is criminal law, where he has written several important judgments, including: State v Rabako, which was the first case defining “rape involving the inflicting of grievous bodily harm”; and Liesching v State, which was the first case where the SCA president’s section 17(2)(f) powers of reconsideration were applied in a criminal law context.

But from his initial foray as a civil law magistrate, Musi has also written important judgments in several other areas of civil law including constitutional law (Rafoneke v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services), and property law (Deon Nel v Petrus de Beer).

He has a particular strength in labour law. After acting stints in the Labour Court (2008–2009) and Labour Appeal Court, he was appointed a permanent LAC judge in 2014, where he remains one of the most senior members.
Notable labour judgments include:

Naude v MEC: Mpumalanga Health – reinstating a doctor dismissed for administering HIV/AIDS medication;
Apollo Tyres v CCMA – expanding the definition of “employment benefits” to include those offered through policy or practice.

Musi has also played an active role in the legal community, having served as an executive member of the Magistrates’ Association of South Africa, and later as national president of the Judicial Officers Association of South Africa (JOASA).

From 2014 to 2019, he chaired the Independent Commission for the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers, which recommends salaries for MPs, ministers, and judges. He’s also served on numerous judiciary committees, including the powerful Heads of Court forum and its Judicial Accountability Committee. In 2024, he was appointed official spokesperson for the judiciary.

The General Council of the Bar (GCB) describes Musi as a “moral exemplar to the Free State Division” whose integrity is “the thread that runs through his career.” On leadership, it notes his “strong administrative capabilities,” including efforts to reduce appeal backlogs and extract outstanding judgments from colleagues.

However, on his potential as a jurisprudential leader — able to galvanise consensus among peers in appellate courts — the GCB says he has authored several unanimous judgments in the SCA and LAC but could not confirm if he was the one to lead consensus, recommending the JSC probe this further.

Musi also served on the Judicial Conduct Tribunal into allegations against former Judge President John Hlophe. Hlophe argued that Musi had made prejudicial public comments, leading to Musi’s recusal.

He drew criticism for assigning a relatively junior acting judge to preside over the high-profile Nulane state capture case — a decision overturned on appeal. Ironically, Musi was part of the SCA panel that heard the appeal and was the lone dissenting voice.

In another major corruption case involving Ace Magashule and Olly Mlamleli, Musi played a mediating role between the NPA and the Acting Judge President over judge allocation.

With a career spanning nearly 40 years, Musi has risen from the cold benches of the district court to the top echelons of judicial leadership. His unorthodox and wide-ranging experience might commend him for the role of Deputy Chief Justice — but it remains to be seen how he will perform in his interview and whether it will be enough to convince the President.

Watch JSC Deputy Judge President Interview of C J Musi – July 2025

Deputy Chief Justice Interview Synopsis

Judge President Cagney Musi’s interview began with a focus on his extensive leadership experience. This included his involvement with the Magistrates’ Association of South Africa, his selection as chairperson of the Provincial Efficiency Enhancement Committee in his capacity as Judge President, and his participation in organisations such as JOASA and the IAJ.

His vision for the judiciary centres on upholding the rule of law, advancing substantive and socio-economic equality, and realising judicial independence and accountability through ethical standards. Following his appointment as head of the Free State Division, he prioritised transformation by encouraging the appointment of more women judges and building a more diverse pool of candidates.

Citing Etienne Mureinik, Musi said the adjudication system should “move from a culture of authority to a culture of justification.” He aimed to promote this through social context training for magistrates, including training on gender-based violence and battered woman syndrome, to foster a judiciary more responsive to lived realities. A notable contribution highlighted in his interview was his role in drafting the judicial wellness policy for integration into SAJEI courses, a model he would like extended to the magistracy.

On implementing a single judiciary, Musi acknowledged the magnitude of the task and noted that scale is the main consideration in integrating the magistracy into the broader judiciary. He explained that a major challenge would be the migration of the work of the Magistrates’ Commission to the Judicial Service Commission, given current resource constraints and systemic issues at the level of the magistracy. However, he did not foresee insurmountable problems and stressed that particular focus should be placed on remuneration and tools of trade. He stated that magistrates’ “salary for life” is not currently sustainable, and that magistrates should migrate out of the Government Employees Pension Fund (GEPF).

Judge President Musi further encouraged the use of social media and called for social media training within the courts to enhance judicial transparency. He distinguished between social media and artificial intelligence, cautioning that judges must be wary of the latter. In the Free State, court rolls are shared via Twitter for easy access by practitioners. He also supported the use of WhatsApp for substituted service—such as serving summonses—as has been done via Facebook in maintenance cases. He argued that social media can help enhance access to justice. On the broader issue of technology, he emphasised the need to digitise the courts, noting that not all courts—including the Free State Division—currently have access to systems like CaseLines. He advocated for all courts to be equipped with appropriate support staff as a matter of urgency.

A contentious point in his interview concerned his appointment of a junior acting judge to preside over the Nulane matter. He admitted that the judicial officer was inexperienced in the High Court but argued that she brought extensive experience in criminal law and had a solid legal background. Musi acknowledged that all judges make mistakes and noted that the error had been rectified on appeal.

After several probing questions, the Judge President defended his decision by noting that the judge had significant experience in criminal law, and that the case in question involved charges of fraud and corruption—essentially a criminal matter. He had assessed her judgments on appeal, discussed her appointment with the Regional Court President, and deemed her competent to handle the case.

Conceding under the weight of scrutiny, Musi stated that if given another chance, he would have handled the allocation differently. The acting judge has since been removed from the Free State bench and is currently undergoing further training.

When asked about the lack of appointments and vacancies for permanent judges, Musi responded that there is no clear formula to address the issue, citing a broader crisis of remuneration. He explained that each division has its own complement of judges, and Judge Presidents often have strategic plans for how vacancies should be filled based on their court’s needs. It is the responsibility of each Judge President to report how many vacancies exist and whether they should be advertised. However, he stressed that low pay makes it difficult to attract “good practitioners” to the bench—an issue he is intimately familiar with, having served as chairperson of the remuneration committee.

October 2018 JSC Interview:

October 2018 Interview synopsis:

An apparent shoo-in to head the Free State Division of the High Court after being given the unofficial ‘stamp of approval’ by his predecessor Mahube Molemela, Deputy Judge President Cagney Musi was duly recommended for appointment by the Judicial Service Commission after a fairly easy interview.

The only potential cropper appeared to be the complaint lodged by Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe against Musi regarding disparaging remarks the latter was alleged to have made at an informal gathering of judges in KwaZulu-Natal. Following the complaint Musi — after initially refusing to — recused himself from the disciplinary conduct tribunal set to hear a matter relating to Hlophe in July this year. The tribunal’s work has yet to begin.

Advocate Lindi Nkosi-Thomas, one of four presidential appointments to the commission, asked Musi whether this complaint should cause the JSC to “defer the decision for appointment” until the matter was resolved? Musi told the commission that as far as he was concerned the JSC had not notified him of any complaint against him so he did not consider this an impediment for appointment.

Later, EFF leader and member of parliament, Julius Malema, pushed Musi in whether there was a complaint against him. Musi reiterated that a complaint may have been lodged but the JSC had yet to inform him of the complaint in writing and to ask for his response. Musi added that while, “factually” it may be correct that there was a complaint against him, he had yet to see sight of it.

Asked about the importance of dissenting judgments, Musi said these add positively to the development of the law since these “give you a different perspective from the same factual matrix, a different interpretation of the law…this is good for the development of the law,” said Musi.

Musi told the commission that his considerable experience as acting judge president of the division had seen him already address issues relating to appeals, Legal Aid Board, magistrate court problems and the timeous handing down of judgments.

As an example he said he had leavened the magistrates court roll when dealing with informal mining by foreigners in the Welkom area of the province by dropping certain charges which may have led to long-winded prosecutions. This allowed those informal miners who were in the country illegally to be repatriated more swiftly.

Hlophe Tribunal Meeting – 2 July 2018:

October 2016 JSC Interview:

October 2016 Interview synopsis:

As chairperson of the Independent Commission for Remuneration of Public Office Bearers, Free State High Court judge Cagney Musi makes recommendations on pay increases for members of parliament.

So his presence in the interview chair immediately induced some light-hearted, slightly obsequious, joshing from the politicians on the Judicial Service Commission — with its self-styled wits Narend Singh of the Inkatha Freedom Party and the Economic Freedom Fighters’ Julius Malema leading the way.

The commission’s mood may have also been breezier following the withdrawal of Musi’s colleague on the Free State Bench, Judge Khalipi “Jake” Moloi: their job potentially made easier since Musi was an experienced administrator with 13 years experience in the magistracy and a further 11 at the high court in Bloemfontein.

In a convivial interview that lasted just over thirty minutes, Musi dealt easily with questions about transformation of the judiciary and his own administrative strengths.

Asked about his acting stint in the Constitutional Court, Musi said he found it “quite daunting” and a “total paradigm shift” in terms of the nature of cases and the rigorous work required. He was duly recommended for appointment.

Enter your keyword

Judge President C (Cagney) Musi