Deputy Judge President of the Western Cape Division of the High Court-Patricia Goliath is not new to controversy biased against Indigenous Afrikan People and any person that is perceived to be pro-RET,Land Expropriation Without Compensation, Supporting or Defending President Zuma.
In her bias she does so through applying similar delaying tactics without flinching even in matters that are "a no brainer" as the JSC puts it to her when she was considered as a candidate in her current position as DJP of WCHC. This behaviour of denying justice to Afrikans which she has practised whilst working at the Constitutional court continues as has been demonstrated in the most recent case involving Advocate Masuku for BXI. She applies delaying tactics making unnecessary demands and not shy to place her "over-cautious" reasoning on the basis of "GRAPEVINE" in her reference to WMC-Media trash, which she seems to have allowed herself to be their captured porn in the Administration of Justice as opposed to the Rule Of Law and The Oath of Office and Proffessional Ethics which should guide her in taking decisions and ensuring that those decisions are taken Effectively and Efficiently in a manner that would not deny the parties concerned Justice. As the saying goes justice delayed is justice denied, and in the Masuku and Xulu ( Masuku's client) she has undoubtedly denied them JUSTICE. Why? Why did Patricia Goliath kept sending Advocate Masuku back and forth on a "NO BRAINER" matter again in this instance,drawing in ssues that are totally IRRELEVANT to the making of a Settlement Agreement between two Consenting parties, a Court Order,despite the fact that she is presented with all substantiating documents,and affidavits appended with Delegated Authority Signatories of the Creditor and the Accounting Officer-DDG of the Debtor-Dept.Of Agriculture?
Instead DJP-Patricia Goliath draws in National Treasury, National Prosecuting Authority, The Minister, The DGs of Agriculture and The Acting Accountant General on an ADMINISTRATIVE arrangement matter that all these other parties are:
(a) not party to,
(b) not cited,
(c) does not fall within their scope of duties nor delegated powers of authority
(d) The Acting Accountant General of National Treasury even if National Treasury were to be responsible for authorising a decision of administraive nature made by another Department, in this case Agriculture,AAG would be a level far below to oversee or authorise a transaction already approved by a Deputy Director General in terms of the organisations hierachy and ( Delegation Of Authority Frameworks (DAF) that exist in any organisation as prescribed by Company Law, Corporate Governance and Public Finance Management Act which DPJ Patricia Goliath would have no knowledge of nor be a fundi for that matter as these fall outside of her area of expertise as a legal professional.
Why then does Patricia Goliath elects to confer upon herself an Auditor Responsibility/Powers in this matter when she is not qualified to do so,nor even asked to Audit the "transaction" which she then says "twenty-million is a lot of money" ,lot of money to her perhaps or is it a lot of money for a Black Legal Firm to receive their payment for services rendered which the Debtor-Agriculture is not disputing but rather making a settlement arrangement,which,even a Standard Six Student will tell you its an outcome of an overdue payment where the debtor would have failed to pay for some reason or the other, ( reasoning is neither her nor there). Taking a Settlement Agreement To court is mostly a procedural matter to cover the Creditor against further delays,becomes a no brainer when the parties are in agreement and have taken care of all the processes that would have been necessary to seal the Agreement and by mutual consent seek a signature of the court for the agreement to be a Court Order. Why draw NPA in this matter,a prosecuting Authority when no case is being made or opened by either party against the other?
This is Judicial Over-reach at its worst, which Patricia Goliath is used to doing and getting away with.
We would remember how as an assistant of the Constitutional Court in 2016/7 she penned another controversial judgement which bordered on Judicial Over-reach, giving the then Speaker of Parliament,Baleka Mbete, powers not accruing to her,powers to decide a motion of no confidence to remove President Zuma through the secret ballot, when the Constitution and Parliamentary Rules did not confer such powers to the discretion of the Speaker of Parliament. Nobody in the captured judiciary in particular Concourt Judges saw it fit to not meddle in that arm of the State's matters because they had to remove Zuma by hook or by crook and when all else fail abuse their powers of office as judges to force Zuma out.
Here again Advocate Masuku SC is thrown from pillar to poster simply because he has in his client books President Zuma and Advocate Mkhwebane as clients, who have both been labelled and categorised "enemies of the Apartheid-Colonialist State" called " new dawn",hence every other law and statute must be broken,ignored and dismantled just to deal with these two and send a strong message to every other Indigenous Afrikan that is resolute and stand firm on the Return of Afrikan Land without Compensation, RET and all Nasrec Resolutions that seek to redress Colonisation and Apartheid atrocities and inequalities that came as a result thereof.
Indigenous Afrika People cannot close eyes and act blind of what is happening,nor treat these matters as independent nor in isolation of the other,when the trend and pattern is there for all to see that this is war waged against Afrikans by settler-minorities using and abusing the very same Judiciary whose Roman and Dutch origin was and continue to be forced upon the throats of Afrikans kicking and screaming.
This Patricia Goliath who has only been appointed in 2016 on the High Court bench is the same jugdge who had the audacity to file a complaint against Judge President Hlophe,a legend who has been in the legal profession probably before Patricia could pronounce the word judiciary. She had to trump up an unfounded allegation on the basis "gender/women" rights/abuse. It doesnt matter to her what damage that would make to other women who have valid related cases/complaints,for as long as she can deliver Judge Hlophe's head on a silver platter because he is perceived to have supported President Zuma at some point so he also "must be dealt with" by all means necessary, and probably because He did his duty in 2019 as a Judge President to reprimand ( if he did) Patricia Goliath for this appalling behaviour,and re-allocated the matter to Judge Steyn who ultimately resolved the matter and issued the necessary Court Order. Be that as it may Goliath is not above the law,and should have been reprimanded and acted upon in 2019 already, that the JSC has not acted upon the subsequent complaint lodged by the affected parties as omplainants, is an indication and assurance in itself that there is a very poisonous broederbond with the JSC and Judiciary Structures which see colour first and political alliegencies as determining and guiding factors where and when to discipline who. If you are not in their faction of politics as it is clear now the judiciary have become another Political organisation on its own which is hellbent on pushing World Apartheid Lead agenda of Recolonisation of Afrika as they always have, hence we come to the same conclusion that the majority of Indigenous Afrikans have pronounced on > viz. The Judiciary in South Africa is CAPTURED
Appointed: April 2016
Extract of Controversial DJP Patricia Goliath's Bio:
Appointed: April 2016 ( on the bench)
The Western Cape High Court’s deputy judge president has spent an entire year acting at the Constitutional Court. She is one of few judges to have had such a privilege during a long period of vacancies being left open at the court so as to “widen the pool of candidates”, according to Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng.
It was surprising that Rahube v Rahube and Another, which appeared a no-brainer heard on May 17, 2018, was only delivered on October 30, 2018. In that case, the Constitutional Court was asked to confirm the unconstitutionality of Section 2 (1) of the Upgrading of Land Tenure Rights Act.
HER VIEW ON CUSTOMARY LAW- (demonstrates her lack of appreciation of the Rights of Indigenous Afrika People, in favour of serving colonial masters through roman-dutch law)
"Aside from being asked further questions about her thoughts to customary law and why it was not being developed to its full potential (“its always a challenge”), Goliath otherwise fielded questions which had very little to do with her suitability for appointment."~Interview 2019
DOES GOLIATH EVER TAKES RESPONSIBILITY OF HER ACTIONS/LACK THEREOF ? Records of her condenscending behaviour shows otherwise. She is always right, its her way or no-way and she cannot be reprimanded otherwise she would go to any extreme to revenge herself against his eniors should they dare question her "self-annointed" authority as she has done with the unfounded allegations and lies she made up to lodge a complaint against Judge President Hlophe.
"Goliath refused to take any blame for the backlog in handing down judgments at the Western Cape bench, reiterating that she had spent all of 2018 acting at the Constitutional Court and had been on long leave in 2019. She said the division otherwise ran like a “well-oiled machine”.~ Interview at JSC FOR DJP Position~
When this :
1. lack of taking responsibility showed up in Patricia Goliath's interview, why then did the JSC go further in recommending her for such a High and Responsible Position,
2. despite the fact that she is still teething in the bench itself having only been appointed in 2016 on a fulltime Judge Position and
3. with all negative performance, against her, which include but not limited to: (a)controversial decisions not backed up by LAW/Statutes and
(b) volumnious case backlog in the division of her responsibility at the Western Cape
Was it a question of Connections perhaps or Did Patrcia Goliath Get APPOINTED FOR JOB WELL DONE IN THE ZUMA MATTERS- PAYBACK- COMPENSATION FOR ENABLING PRAVIN AND ILK TO REALLY CAPTURE THE STATE USING THE "JUDICIARY" Forces
Below is an Extract of Patricia Goliath ' s Bio duing her Candidacy for DJP:
April 2019 Interview Synopsis:
With interest growing around the appointment of judges to South Africa’s highest court, attendance in the public gallery grew for the round of Constitutional Court interviews. Many first-time visitors to the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) proceedings would have been forgiven for thinking that they had landed in a session at a charismatic Church — such was the fervour of Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng’s many tangents during Western Cape deputy judge president Patricia Goliath’s interview.
Mogoeng spoke for large swathes of Goliath’s interview so as to comment on varying matters including his fear that there is a “campaign” and “concerted effort” to “attack” and “discredit me”. He said therefore he only reads academic articles “sparingly” and that academic criticism of commercial law judgments coming out of the Constitutional Court was “about protecting that system of law” which was “untouchable” because it also protected the associated privilege.
Sometimes, after a diatribe from the chief justice, Goliath merely sat nonplussed or nodded agreement, with nothing to answer.
When Goliath was asked questions that dealt with her suitability to be appointed to South Africa’s most important court she performed adequately — her responses in no way suggested some divine inspiration.
She was asked by Sifiso Msomi, one of four presidential designations to the JSC, to comment on the “controversies concerning Constitutional Court judgments” including whether it was right for the apex court to deadlock —and make jurisprudential mistakes — in Jacobs and Others v S which was handed down on Valentines Day in 2019. She did not deal with fracture from the court’s previous jurisprudence which the judgment represented.
Goliath said deadlocks were common in other courts, like the Supreme Court in the United States and that while it was “regrettable”, it was a new phenomenon and the court “will learn a lot of lessons” from the experience.
Msomi also asked Goliath for her understanding of the principle of the separation of powers which was “not a dictionary meaning” and to give examples from her judgments which dealt with this doctrine. Goliath, channelling the dictionary, said the principle “recognised the functional independence of the different arms of government”. It also recognised the possibility of intrusions into, and tensions between, the different arms of government. She gave the Outa judgment (which she was not involved in hearing or writing) handed down by the Constitutional Court which dealt with e-tolling, as an example of the judiciary being mindful of not trespassing into the ambit of the executive.
Later, pressed by ANC member of the national council of provinces Jomo Nyambi, on one of her judgments which dealt with the separation of powers, Goliath cited the Tlouamma v Speaker of Parliament judgment which she handed down in the Western Cape High Court. It dealt with the a vote-of-no-confidence against former president Jacob Zuma (see profile).
Commissioner Dali Mpofu noted that the Constitutional Court had been critical of that judgement in the 2017 matter, United Democratic Movement v Speaker, National Assembly and Others.
Goliath said the Constitutional Court had “clarified” the aspect of the secret ballot and that while she had been unable to find it in the parliamentary rules, the apex court had ruled it was covered, as an option, in Rule 104.
SCA justice Azhar Cachalia asked Goliath if she was aware of the academic criticisms of the Constitutional Court’s judgments in private law matters. Goliath said she was not aware of these criticisms.
“Surely you should at least be inquisitive in how the judgments of the Constitutional Court are perceived and if there are criticisms have substance or don’t have substance?” asked Cachalia.
Goliath responded that she was not “completely oblivious” but was not aware of any criticisms that the court needed more judges with experience in areas like delict and commercial law.
Aside from being asked further questions about her thoughts to customary law and why it was not being developed to its full potential (“its always a challenge”), Goliath otherwise fielded questions which had very little to do with her suitability for appointment.
Goliath refused to take any blame for the backlog in handing down judgments at the Western Cape bench, reiterating that she had spent all of 2018 acting at the Constitutional Court and had been on long leave in 2019. She said the division otherwise ran like a “well-oiled machine”.
EXTRACT OF COMPLAINT AGAINST PATRICIA GOLIATH - ( Captured- PDF Member)
Comments