A Single Judiciary

In December 2023, the South African judiciary held the first Judges’ Conference in nearly 20 years at Sun City. Key resolutions adopted at that conference were the establishment of a single judiciary and the judiciary’s institutional independence.

What is a single judiciary, and what is judicial institutional independence?

A Single Judiciary

The ‘single judiciary’ is currently understood to mean placing all courts, both the superior and lower courts, under a single judiciary headed by the Chief Justice, in terms of section 166 of the Constitution.

A Department of Justice discussion paper identifies several key features of a single judiciary, including:

1. One governance framework for judges and magistrates;
2. leadership by the Chief Justice;
3. uniform judicial ethics;
4. consistent disciplinary processes;
5. integrated judicial administration;
6. harmonised appointment and regulatory systems;
7. a coherent court hierarchy.

Judicial Institutional Independence

Historically, in most Commonwealth countries, the judiciary has been part of the justice department under the Attorney General or a Minister. There is a split between judges and magistrates. This legacy has endured in the English-speaking world, including in South Africa, both before and after the 1994 democratic transition.

However, in most modern democracies, and in recognition of the principle of separation of powers, there has been a move towards institutional autonomy for the judiciary.

This institutional autonomy is seen as an essential part of judicial independence; hence it is called ‘judicial institutional independence’.

Related to this is the concept of ‘judiciary-led administration’. This means that judges are in charge of, or have a greater say over, essential court operations such as human resources, budgets, IT, and infrastructure for the whole court system.

The evolution of judicial institutional independence over the years

In South Africa, the move towards a single judiciary and judiciary-led administration has been under discussion for many years.

At the 2003 National Judges’ Symposium, a comprehensive study of the idea was proposed, followed by a 2009 report on how judicial institutional independence would be implemented.

The first phase of implementation came in 2010, when then-President Zuma proclaimed the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ) as a national department responsible for the administration of the superior courts. The OCJ would serve as a temporary structure to usher in the remaining reforms associated with a new institutional model for the entire judiciary.

In 2011, former Chief Justices Langa and Chaskalson produced a study on institutional models for the judiciary, titled Capacitating the Office of the Chief Justice and Laying the Foundations for Judicial Independence: The Next Frontier in Our Constitutional Democracy: Judicial Independence (otherwise known as The Next Frontier Report).

That report proposed full institutional autonomy for the judiciary, similar to the Auditor-General, whereby judges would oversee all court operations and infrastructure under a Judicial Council headed by the Chief Justice, with administration managed by a senior official, the Secretary-General.

In 2012, the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution was passed, establishing the Chief Justice as the Head of the Judiciary. Alongside this was the passage of the Superior Courts Act, 2013, which placed the management of court operations in the hands of the Judges President, who served as Heads of the Courts. This was intended to be followed by a full transfer of all court operations from the Department of Justice, including the placement of judges and magistrates under a single umbrella.

However, there was no follow-through. The OCJ was never repositioned as an independent entity, nor was judiciary-led court administration fully implemented.

What is the currently proposed model for judicial institutional independence?

In January 2024, a fresh study on judicial institutional models was proposed in a report by a committee chaired by retired Judge President Bernard Ngoepe (also known as the ‘Ngoepe Report’).

Building on the previous proposals, the Ngoepe Report also proposed a phased approach towards institutional independence for the judiciary.

It has the following components:

• A Judicial Council, comprising the Heads of Courts and chaired by the Chief Justice, serving as the executive authority of the Judiciary. It will have overall responsibility for the policy and functions of the Judiciary, including preparing its annual budget for presentation to Parliament and overseeing all entities within the Judiciary, such as the OCJ.
• The Office of the Chief Justice will be the executive arm of the Judiciary, responsible for administering court operations, including budgeting and finance, court infrastructure, human resources, IT, and procurement, among other functions. It will be established by standalone legislation. The OCJ will be headed by the Secretary-General, with staff appointed or transferred into it, and will be overseen by the Judicial Council. Over time, all court operations, including those of lower courts, would fall exclusively within the OCJ.
• A Courts Advisory Body – a larger body chaired by the Chief Justice and including the Minister of Justice, and one representative each from the Judges President, the Chief Magistrates, the Regional Court Presidents, law professors, Parliament, traditional leaders, Chapter 9 institutions supporting democracy, and two legal practitioners. As the name suggests, the CAB will be responsible for advising the Judicial Council on any matter referred to it by the Council.
• An Executive Committee of the Judicial Council, comprising the Chief Justice, the Secretary-General and up to three other members of the Judicial Council, is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the OCJ and court operations generally.
• Judicial standards, such as the Norms and Standards for Court Performance and the Judicial Code of Conduct, will be harmonised across all superior and lower courts. It is not yet clear whether judicial standards bodies such as the Judicial Service Commission and the Magistrates Commission will be merged into one.
• Over time, judicial institutions such as the Rules Board for Courts of Law, the South African Judicial Education Institute, the Judicial Service Commission, and the Magistrates Commission would all be housed under a single entity (the OCJ), rather than split across different institutions.
• It is also proposed that responsibility for court infrastructure will be transferred from the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure to the OCJ.
• Judicial remuneration and conditions of service are also intended to be harmonised under a single structure – a Judicial Remuneration Commission that will determine the salaries, benefits and conditions of service of all judicial officers.

In a historic announcement in June 2025, President Cyril Ramaphosa accepted, in principle, full judicial institutional autonomy and the establishment of the Judiciary as a standalone arm of state, no longer forming part of the Department of Justice. He committed that the Minister of Justice would coordinate the implementation of this decision through a technical task team, which would also comprise nominees from the Judiciary.

This work is ongoing. In October 2025, Justice Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi announced that certain shared services, including IT, security, libraries and a portion of the budget, would be transferred from the Department of Justice to the OCJ by the start of the new financial year on 1 April 2026.

The 2026 State of the Nation Address and the 2026 Budget provided further details, including the transfer of nearly R800 million from the Department of Justice to the OCJ as part of efforts to establish judicial institutional independence.

The upcoming 2026 Judges’ Conference in July is therefore a watershed moment to take stock of progress on judicial institutional independence reforms, which have gained momentum since the 2023 Judges’ Conference. Importantly, it will provide greater clarity on what these reforms could mean for the judiciary going forward.

See: The establishment of the OCJ: 2010-2013
See also: Department of Justice Discussion Document on the Transformation of the Judicial System
See also: Judges Matter: Judicial Governance in South Africa
See also: Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi Budget Vote Address