Former South African presidents Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma have filed a court challenge to remove retired judge Sisi Khampepe from heading an inquiry into delays in Truth and Reconciliation Commission prosecutions. The move targets alleged political interference in apartheid-era cases and raises questions about judicial impartiality. President Cyril Ramaphosa has stated he will abide by the court's decision.
In a significant legal move, former presidents Thabo Mbeki and Jacob Zuma approached the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg to challenge the legitimacy of the commission investigating delays in TRC prosecutions. The commission, appointed by President Cyril Ramaphosa, is led by retired Constitutional Court judge Sisi Khampepe, alongside retired Northern Cape Judge President Frans Kgomo and advocate Andrea Gabriel. It is tasked with completing its work by 29 May 2026 and submitting a final report by 31 July 2026.
The challenge began with Zuma's application on 6 February 2026, later joined by Mbeki, seeking to review and set aside Khampepe's decision to dismiss their recusal application. They argue that Khampepe's previous roles—serving on the TRC's Amnesty Committee from 1996 to 2001 and as Deputy National Director of Public Prosecutions from 1998 to 1999—create a reasonable apprehension of bias, given the inquiry's focus on potential political interference from 2003 onward.
Mbeki's notice of motion requests Ramaphosa to terminate Khampepe's appointment immediately and declares all her commission actions a nullity. Ramaphosa, in court papers, indicated he would not oppose the bid but would follow the court's ruling. He also noted that awareness of certain past TRC decisions by Khampepe might have led him to reconsider her appointment to avoid criticism.
The commission's legal team, led by chief evidence leader advocate Ishmael Semenya, described the challenge as a dilatory and meritless strategy to evade accountability. Semenya argued it constitutes an abuse of court process, brought midstream without manifest prejudice, and emphasized a temporal boundary separating Khampepe's past roles from the inquiry's scope. He stated, “It is too far-fetched to speak of prosecution policy to link the Chairperson as the one who ‘shaped’ it.”
Zuma's affidavit introduced claims from an anonymous whistleblower alleging Khampepe shared research with Semenya to resist recusal, which the commission dismissed as slanderous and unsupported. Separately, concerns about Semenya's impartiality were raised by groups like the Calata Group, representing families of apartheid victims such as the Cradock Four, due to his prior NPA representation. Khampepe dismissed his recusal in December 2025, ruling that evidence leaders are not decision-makers and the issues do not overlap with the inquiry.
This litigation highlights tensions over judicial independence and accountability for apartheid-era actions, with survivors facing further delays in seeking justice.
