Case Explained: Mengo’s Legal Team Takes Fight to JSC – Legal Perspective

The legal battle surrounding Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge is far from settled. Despite a Judicial Conduct Tribunal clearing him of gross misconduct while finding him guilty of a lesser charge of “flirtatious” WhatsApp exchanges, the legal team representing his secretary, Andiswa Mengo, has vowed to continue fighting for accountability.

The matter now moves to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) , scheduled to consider the Tribunal’s report on 5 March 2026. Judge Mbenenge remains on special leave, a status the Office of the Chief Justice confirmed will continue until the JSC formally communicates its decision.

A Tribunal Report Under Fire

While the Tribunal found Mbenenge guilty of misconduct, it framed the interactions as consensual flirtation between two adults and notably rejected the presence of a power imbalancea finding Mengo’s legal team has condemned as deeply flawed.

“In no workplace would it be acceptable for a manager or colleague to ask for a woman to take off her jacket or to take off any part of her clothing,” said Chriscy Blouws, Mengo’s attorney, in an interview with SABC. “But instead, in this finding, we find that the Tribunal decided that there was, in fact, no power imbalance between the Judge Presidentthe most senior person in her workplaceand she, a secretary.”

Attacking the Credibility of the Complainant

Perhaps the most stinging criticism from Mengo’s legal team targets the Tribunal’s assessment of her credibility. The report, they argue, questioned whether she was dishonest under oatha characterisation they “strongly dispute.”

The Women’s Legal Centre, which represented Mengo during the Tribunal proceedings, warned that this approach sends a “chilling message” to workplace harassment survivors. “This framing, and the narrative emerging from the report, risks sending a chilling message to women who experience sexual harassment in the workplace; that speaking out may result in intense scrutiny rather than protection,” the organisation stated.

What Happens Next?

The JSC now carries the weight of determining appropriate action. It is not bound by the Tribunal’s findings and can recommend sanctions ranging from a reprimand to removal from office. Mengo’s legal team has confirmed it will make submissions to the JSC, challenging the report’s conclusions and advocating for what they term “survivor-centred justice.”

A Defining Moment for Judicial Accountability

This case has become a lightning rod for broader conversations about power, gender, and accountability within South Africa’s judiciary. For Mengo’s supporters, it tests whether the system designed to judge others can apply the same standards to itself. For the JSC, it presents an opportunity to clarify what conduct is compatible with judicial officeand what is not.

As Blouws put it simply: “The process is not over.”