The process of appointing the next Deputy Chief Justice

President Cyril Ramaphosa has once again broken with past precedent by nominating four candidates for the position of Deputy Chief Justice. The vacancy arose in September 2024 on the appointment of Chief Justice Maya to the top job.

They nominees for DCJ are:

• Judge President Dunstan Mlambo of the Gauteng High Court,
• Judge President Pule Tlaletsi of the Northern Cape High Court, and
• Judge President Cagney Musi of the Free State High Court.

The fourth nominee, Justice Mahube Molemela, President of the Supreme Court of Appeal, withdrew from the race shortly after the nominations were announced.

Through these nominations, President Ramaphosa kickstarts the appointment process for DCJ in terms of section 174(3) of the Constitution.

This process entails the following:

1. The President nominating candidates.
2. The President consulting leaders of political parties in the National Assembly in Parliament for their views on the suitability of the candidates.
3. The President consulting the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) on its views on the suitability of the candidates.
4. The President making the appointment through a public announcement, which includes the effective date when the DCJ starts their appointment.

This wide-ranging consultation process ensures that the Deputy Chief Justice appointment is rigorous, by carefully scrutinising the judicial track record of the candidates and assessing this in relation to the qualities required for a DCJ.

Any concerns about a potential Deputy Chief Justice must be raised either by the political leaders in Parliament or by the JSC.

Political party leaders usually submit their comments through letters sent in reply to the President.

The JSC interviews for the next Deputy Judge President will take place on 2 – 3 July 2025 at the Sandton Hotel in Benmore, Sandton.

The JSC usually calls for public comment (which closed on 27 May 2025) and conducts public interviews with each candidate (scheduled for 2 and 3 July 2025)  before submitting its views to the President.

While it is ultimately the President’s decision to appoint a DCJ, he is still required to seriously consider the views of political party leaders and those of the JSC.

Should there be a serious concern that affects the integrity or suitability of a DCJ candidate, the President must reconsider the appointment. If he fails to do so, the appointment would be vulnerable to a constitutional challenge on the grounds of irrationality. If found to be irrational by a court of law, the appointment must set aside.

Judges Matter will be closely monitoring the process of appointing the DCJ and will attend the public interviews. For updates, follow @WhyJudgesMatter on Twitter/X and on LinkedIn and Facebook.