Mbenenge tribunal: First of 2 weeks of witness testimonies wraps up
A total of six witnesses appeared before the judicial body, which is tasked with investigating the claims after High Court secretary Andiswa Mengo accused Mbenenge of making unwanted sexual advances towards her between 2021 and 2022.
Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge at the Judicial Conduct Tribunal investigating the sexual harassment allegations against him. Picture: Katlego Jiyane/Eyewitness News
JOHANNESBURG - The Judicial Conduct Tribunal investigating allegations of sexual harassment against Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge.has wrapped up hearings for the first of two weeks of witness testimonies.
A total of six witnesses appeared before the judicial body, which is tasked with investigating the claims by high court secretary Andiswa Mengo that Mbenenge made unwanted sexual advances towards her between 2021 and 2022.
Some of the evidence put before the tribunal in January was tested, as experts zoomed into the WhatsApp messages exchanged between the two parties, the emojis used during the interactions, and the meanings behind them.
While some of the evidence corroborated Mengo’s claims, other testimonies were at odds with her submissions.
Bananas were not fruits, eggplants were not vegetables, and syringes were not used for medical purposes.
This was the testimony of expert witness, forensic and legal linguist Dr Zakeera Docrat, who said Mbenenge employed emojis with sexual connotations within certain contexts in his conversations with Mengo.
“In this context and in this chain, intimacy is used, then followed by a specific sequence of the eggplant and the peach. which will mean sexual intercourse.”
In some instances, Docrat’s meanings corroborated Mengo's claims, while at other times they differed.
In one instance, Mbenenge used a syringe in his chats with the junior staffer, which Docrat defined as a male’s private parts, after the judge said he should give Mengo a boost, but the junior staffer attributed the emoji to the judge’s intentions for her to feel better.
The clashing versions led to this question being posed by Mbenenge’s legal counsel, Advocate Griffiths Madonsela.
“Am I to understand you then to be suggesting that if Mengo believed that she was sending an emoji X to mean Y and you come to the conclusion that it meant Z, you should be taken as speaking to the meaning of what Mengo meant to convey?”
Docrat concluded her testimony as the second expert witness in the matter, emphasising that context determined the meaning ascribed to the emojis.
MBENENGE’S LEGAL TEAM’S BID TO DISCREDIT WITNESSES
The bid by Mbenenge’s legal team to discredit witnesses also played out before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal this week.
The judge president disputes sending explicit content to the junior staffer but admits to wanting sexual relations with her.
Mengo filed her complaint in 2023.
What happened when Mengo laid her complaint against Mbenenge?
This is one of several questions before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal that is combing through the evidence presented in a bid to uncover the truth.
As it sifts through the testimonies, a dispute of facts arose when evidence leader, Advocate Salome Scheepers, called her third witness, former Judicial Service Commission (JSC) secretary Kutlwano Moretlwa.
Moretlwa alleges that Mengo was in possession of her laptop and had a copy of her complaint before it was misplaced by retired Chief Justice Raymond Zondo in December 2022.
But when Mengo was cross-examined in January, she alleged that she did not have the initial copy when she laid the official grievance in 2023, despite what Mbenenge’s legal counsel, Advocate Muzi Sikhakhane, described as striking similarities in the two complaints.
“The second complaint about which we are today, in certain parts, which is consistent with your version, is the same as the initial one, including mistakes, including spaces between where the word ends and where the full stop is.”
Moretlwa also stated that she forgot that the initial complaint was misplaced and insisted that while she provided help to Mengo substantially in drafting the complaint, the High Court staffer was in possession of her laptop.
Mengo’s legal counsel, Advocate Nasreen Rajab-Budlender, expressed concern over Moretlwa’s testimony.
“Ms Moretlwa, I must tell you that I find your evidence concerning and that I will argue that your version should not be accepted, particularly as it relates to Ms Mengo in due course. Do you want to respond to that?”
Sikhakhane also appeared concerned over the role Moretlwa played in drafting Mengo’s complaint, which she would later be tasked with receiving and processing as per the JSC Act.