24 February 2025
Western Cape High Court Judge Mushtak Parker is facing a complaint laid by ten judges. Photo: Oupa Nkosi for Judges Matter
Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe (now impeached) accused his colleague Judge Mushtak Parker of wanting to have sex with his wife, before pushing him violently against a bookcase, jamming his back into a key, which then broke, and causing him to fall to the ground, injuring his back.
This was related by Judge Parker to several judges in the division, one of whom even assisted him in writing up an affidavit detailing what happened.
However, Judge Parker later recanted his version of events and withdrew a complaint against Hlophe, saying he had “misconstrued the events” of the day.
Now Judge Parker is facing possible impeachment for giving these two “contradictory and mutually exclusive versions” about what happened in his chambers in February 2019.
On Monday, a Judicial Conduct Tribunal, headed by retired Judge Bernard Ngoepe, heard evidence relating to this charge, which emanated from a complaint laid by ten Western Cape High Court judges.
Judge Parker is also facing a further charge of dishonesty in that he did not disclose, when accepting appointment as an acting judge and permanent judge, that the law firm, of which he was the managing partner, had a trust fund deficit of millions of rand.
A Judicial Conduct Committee previously ruled that he must face a tribunal to determine if he breached the Judicial Code of Conduct and is fit and proper to stay on the bench.
It was unclear from Monday’s proceedings what Parker’s version is. He has made no formal admissions and his advocate, William King, said that his instructions were not to raise factual disputes and that his client would not testify.
He did not pose a single question to any of the witnesses. Most of them were sitting judges, called by evidence leader Dr Chris Ndzengu to confirm the contents of affidavits they had made concerning what Parker had told them.
Judge Derek Wille, who is not one of the ten complainants, said Parker had approached him in 2019 “very upset”, alleging Hlophe had physically attacked him in his chambers. Wille wrote up an affidavit for him and, at Parker’s request, had emailed it to his private email address.
“At that time he also brought along the damaged key which he said broke when he fell against the bookcase after being struck by the Judge President,” Wille said.
Wille said he had photographed the key on his phone. He had kept a copy of the unsigned statement.
Parker had returned later that day, with two copies of the affidavit, now commissioned and asked him to keep one of them for safekeeping.
Some time after that Parker asked him to return the original affidavit to him.
At some stage, because of Parker’s u-turn on the incident, many of his colleagues refused to work with him and had laid a complaint against him.
“I took a slightly different view. My position was neutral, like Switzerland,” said Wille.
Judge Judith Cloete said Parker had disclosed the assault to her while they were presiding over a civil appeal, but she only learnt the details when she received her colleagues’ complaint letter against Parker and Parker’s response in which he claimed that “events may not have unfolded in the way I initially perceived”.
She said she found the letter “deeply concerning”, given that he had told her about the assault in December 2019. Just a few months later in March 2020, he was saying something different.
Parker had subsequently written to her, accusing her of “aligning herself with those attempting to discredit” him and Hlophe.
Judge Andre Le Grange also testified that Parker told him about the assault.
Judge Mark Sher, who said he had known Parker for years before they both became judges, said he had approached him after hearing “rumours”.
Parker had told him that Hlophe had been angry and accused him of wanting a sexual relationship with his (then) wife, Judge Gayeet Salie-Hlophe. This was after Parker had apparently tugged at her gown in the tea-room which she considered to be sexual harassment.
According to Sher, Parker told him that he was trying to explain that the allegation was not true, when Hlophe advanced on him in a “threatening manner” and pushed him backwards into the bookcase.
Sher said Parker had been very upset by the incident, had gone for counselling, and told him that Judge Wille had helped him draft an affidavit.
Later, Parker told him that he had been called into a meeting with the JP and two other judges “and there was a suggestion that he had been pressurised not to proceed with any action”.
But Parker did not, at any stage, say he had misconstrued what had occurred.
Judge Elizabeth Steyn said she too had heard rumours and had read reports in the media about the assault.
“I felt sorry for him. He looked drained and stressed. At one stage I walked past his chambers [in January 2020] and I stopped and said I am really sorry about what’s going on in your life. I asked him if it was really true that he was assaulted. And then he described the incident to me. He was still terribly upset, as was his wife. He told me his wife said there was still a mark on his back from the key.”
Later, when Parker retracted what he had said about the assault, he had told her that “some people have their own agendas” and wanted him to lay a complaint (against Hlophe).
“He never said the assault did not take place.”
Advocate Geoff Budlender, who is representing the ten complainant judges, said that in light of the fact the evidence given so far was “undisputed” with no cross examination, it would be unnecessary to call any more of judges and closed his case.
Regarding the complaint concerning Parker’s law firm and its trust deficit, which was lodged by the Cape Bar Council, former council chair Andrew Breitenbach said the complaint was largely based on court papers in a strike-off application by the Legal Practice Council (LPC) involving Parker’s former law firm, Parker and Khan Inc.
He said over a number of years the firm had a trust deficit of between R4.7-million and R7-million, but this had never been reported to the LPC and there was evidence that Parker himself was well aware of it.
When he applied for permanent appointment in 2017, he had not disclosed these matters in his questionnaire, nor during his interview.
“The council submits that his conduct is not compatible with one holding judicial office and constitutes a grossly negligent breach to uphold the dignity of the judiciary,” Breitenbach said.
Irfan Parker - Judge Parker’s brother and partner in the law firm - was a reluctant witness. Initially, he asked that his face be concealed on the Zoom link “due to the sensitivity of the matter”, but after an objection by advocate King, he consented.
Asked by advocate Janet McCurdie, for the Cape Bar, if he was confirming that the shortfall in the trust account had been noticed as early as June 2016, and that “it was in the knowledge of yourself and your brother”, he replied: “I do confirm the contents of my affidavit but I am not going to further indulge on that. It’s pretty obvious why. I was assured that I would have to do nothing more than confirm the correctness and truthfulness of the affidavit.”
The hearing of evidence was finalised on Monday. The tribunal will hear oral argument on 29 April.