Ramaphosa’s SONA Special Courts idea

RAMAPHOSA’S SONA SPECIAL COURTS IDEA – GOOD INTENTIONS BUT BAD PLAN

This opinion piece was first published in the Daily Maverick on 13 February. 

At Thursday’s (12 February 2026) State of the Nation Address, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced the government’s intention to establish specialised courts, with dedicated judges and court rolls, to deal with tender disputes arising from large infrastructure projects.

This is not a bad idea. It just misses the point. South Africa does need more courts and more judges, but not in the way the president intends. In fact, implemented unchanged, Ramaphosa’s plan would be a waste of resources.

South Africa does need more courts and more judges, but not in the way the president intends. In fact, implemented unchanged, Ramaphosa’s plan would be a waste of resources.

The need for more judges

South Africa has not had a substantial increase in the number of judges in 16 years. Since 2009, we have operated with around 250 judges. In that same period, the country’s population, together with the complexity of the economy, has grown significantly, placing pressure on the courts.

Source: Moseneke High Court Rationalisation Committee Report Phase 2

The Gauteng High Court, which sits at South Africa’s economic hub and handles nearly half of all civil litigation, has operated with about 42 judges in Pretoria and 34 in Johannesburg. In 2009, these 34 judges in Johannesburg adjudicated 7 253 civil cases (trials, motions and appeals). In 2024, those same 34 judges adjudicated 24 021 civil cases – an over 300% increase in the workload. It’s no surprise then that at the beginning of 2025, it took nearly six years (up to 2031!) to get a trial date at that court.

Various initiatives have been tried to stem this deluge in Gauteng, the epicentre of the judicial scarcity crisis. These include creating a dedicated commercial court roll and an insolvency court roll to channel those cases and reduce lead times; a massive recruitment of acting judges (including ‘pro bono judges’, which are practising lawyers who donate their pro bono hours to the court); and even compulsory mediation instead of trials.

But all of these have effectively been shifting the deck chairs on a sinking Titanic. The real solution is simply to increase the number of judges, courts, and staff across the board.

The real solution is simply to increase the number of judges, courts, and staff across the board.

In 2021, then Minister of Justice Ronald Lamola appointed retired Deputy Chief Justice Dikgang Moseneke to chair a committee to investigate the number of new judges’ posts needed for modern South Africa. The final report of the Moseneke Committee, released in 2025, recommended a minimum 20% increase in the number of judges across the country, with the Gauteng and Limpopo high courts being the top priority. Since then, there has been precious little on the government’s plans to seriously implement these recommendations.

Current Justice Minister Mamoloko Kubayi has announced a small increase in additional judges’ posts in Gauteng, but this would only be scratching the surface. A more durable solution to ensure faster adjudication is a substantial increase in judges nationwide.

Ramaphosa’s plan needs tweaking

Ramaphosa’s proposal is likely informed by a genuine concern about the infrastructure implementation delays caused by a slow adjudication system in a complex and highly litigious area of the law.

Recently, the KwaZulu-Natal High Court adjudicated the disputed awarding by Transnet of the R11 billion tender to operate Durban’s Pier 2 Container Terminal to the Filipino company International Container Services Inc. The tender was awarded in July 2023. In March 2024, the port operating unit of Danish mega logistics company Maersk filed a judicial review case disputing the tender.

The case was heard in April 2025, and judgment dismissing the review was delivered in October 2025, clearing the way for Ramaphosa’s signature solution to the port and logistics crisis.

While creating a dedicated court to deal with similar cases seems like an attractive proposition, it is still not an effective solution.

Firstly, where would this court sit? Yes, most infrastructure tender disputes are in Gauteng (where all national departments are headquartered); however, the Transnet case was in Durban; the R1 trillion nuclear deal case was in Cape Town.

Secondly, these sorts of cases usually take a long time from the initial filing to when the case is ripe for hearing. What would the dedicated judges do in the meantime, twiddle their thumbs?

A better solution would be to first increase the number of judges across various high court divisions. This immediately increases the judicial capacity to carry out this specialised work, but also assists in other areas.

Secondly, it would create a dedicated court as a hybrid court operating nationwide, but the judge president would be stationed, probably in Gauteng. Judges with specialised skills from various provinces can then be rostered for a term, based on the pipeline of cases on the roll. Some cases would be heard physically in existing high court buildings, while others can be dealt with virtually to save costs. Should the case pipeline be low, these judges would be redeployed for normal work at their base stations.

Thirdly, flexible rules could be introduced to expedite the hearing of these cases, similar to the rules used by the commercial court roll in Johannesburg.

These three steps would have a far greater impact than what Ramaphosa proposes in SONA. However, it would still not address the fundamental and urgent problem of an overall shortage of judges in South Africa. That is what Ramaphosa should also focus on in 2026.

Mbekezeli Benjamin is a research and advocacy officer at Judges Matter.

Feature image credit: President Cyril Ramaphosa delivers the 2026 State of the Nation Address. (Photo: Phando Jikelo/ Parliament RSA)