Motata to know his fate as parliamentary committee debates impeachment

All Richard Baird has ever wanted since Judge Nkola Motata drove through the wall of his home in 2007 was for procedure to be followed and hopefully – after losing his family, home and business – justice.

The parliamentary portfolio committee on justice and correctional services (PPCJ) will tomorrow begin its debate on the man who gave body to the phrase “drunk as a judge”.

On 24 October, the committee “resolved to provide … Judge Nkola Motata until the middle of November to provide him with extenuating circumstances to consider when they deliberate on their impeachment”.

Baird recieves no invite for his views

No invite was sent to Baird to ask for his views on extenuating – or aggravating – circumstances.

In his sworn affidavit to the committee, Baird notes his attempts to contact parliamentary legal advisor, Dr Barbara Loots, on 8, 13 and 15 November, and has had no response.

ALSO READ: ‘No further delay’: Judges Hlophe, Motata fate to be debated in Parliament next month

Baird may never get one, as the committee has followed Loots’ recommendation that its role “is limited and does not include conducting an enquiry or repeating the work of the JSC.

Parliament’s responsibility is to indicate whether the finding justifies impeachment.”

Still, it hasn’t stopped Baird attempting to get a last gasp message to the committee.

“In the period of 17 years… since the original incident and during this entire time, Judge Motata has shown no remorse, whatsoever, and neither has he extended any apology to me for the incident itself and his proven false allegations of racism against me,” his affidavit read.

Baird said he had suffered extreme reputational, personal and financial damage as a result of Motata’s utterances, and believed his rights were being ignored.

ALSO READ: ‘No loopholes’: Parliament starts process to impeach judges Hlophe and Motata

SCA’s findings scathing

The Supreme Court of Appeal’s Justice Visvanathan Ponnan’s judgment – finding there was no justification for the Judicial Service Commission rejecting the findings of the Judicial Conduct Tribunal – was scathing.

“Judge Motata’s conduct was egregious, particularly when one has regard to the cumulative consequence of both the AfriForum and Pretorius SC complaints,” Ponnan said in June.

“His behaviour at the scene of the incident was characterised by racism, sexism and vulgarity. The public watched him conduct a dishonest defence during his trial and on appeal.

They watched him dishonestly accuse Mr Baird of using the k-word, only to withdraw the accusation.

“They watched him lie under oath to the tribunal about his level of intoxication, as the video of him slurring his words and stumbling went viral. His conduct is inimical to his office. For as long as he is entitled to be called ‘Judge Motata’, the judiciary continues to be stained in the eyes of the public.”

ALSO READ: Sobering verdict: SCA ruling paves way for retired judge Motata to be impeached

Baird doesn’t want a ‘pity party’

Baird said he didn’t want a pity party.

“This is about people need to be brave enough to say enough. People need to look at evidence and not blindly follow authority.”

Under questioning by KwaZulu-Natal Judge President Achmat Jappie, Motata had clung to his assertion he had been “provoked aggressively” when he was called a “f*****g k****r”, which was why he had responded the way he did.