When passing judgment in the important Phala Phala issue on Friday, chief justice Mandisa Maya began by taking responsibility for the delay in the matter which was heard in November 2024.
“At the outset, I must take full responsibility for the delay in producing this judgment concerning an extremely difficult matter of great national importance. I tender my sincere apologies to the parties, my colleagues and fellow South Africans for the inconvenience it has caused,” Maya said.
Her apology comes as the latest statistics from the Office of the Chief Justice show that as at the beginning of Term 3 of 2025, a total of 1,657 judgments were reported as reserved.
Some 302 of these judgments, representing an overall 18% of the reserved matters, had been reserved and were outstanding for a period exceeding six months. The remaining 1,355, representing an overall 82%, had been reserved for a period of less than six months.
The judicial norms and standards for the performance on judicial functions determine that, except in exceptional cases where it is not possible to do so, every effort shall be made to hand down judgments no later than three months after the last hearing.
The statistics also showed that during that period, the Constitutional Court had 21 reserved judgments, 13 of those reserved for more than six months.
The Pretoria high court led the list with 55 judgments that had been reserved for more than six months, followed by the Labour Court in Johannesburg with 51 and the Durban Labour Court with 31.
But the Labour Appeal Court, the high court in Middelburg and the Electoral Court had no reserved judgments of more than six months.
The chief justice’s opening statement was notable not only for its apology, but also for what it represented: a rare and meaningful example of judicial accountability.
Following the release of the report, the DA said the backlog posed a major obstacle to access to justice in South Africa and undermined public confidence in the legal system.
It said it will use parliamentary processes to investigate the reasons for the astronomical backlog in reserved judgments.
The party argued that the country required a judiciary capable of handling cases efficiently to uphold the rule of law. It warned that delays in the administration of justice contributed to declining respect for the law and increased criminality.
Against this backdrop, the chief justice’s opening statement was notable not only for its apology, but also for what it represented: a rare and meaningful example of judicial accountability.
Although courts wield considerable public power, judges seldom address institutional shortcomings in personal terms.
By publicly accepting responsibility for the delay, Maya recognised that justice delayed is far more than a procedural or administrative issue. The delay carries real consequences for litigants, weakens public confidence and affects constitutional governance.
While Maya’s apology is welcome, it is incomplete without a commitment to reform or an assurance to the public that the problem will not recur.
The chief justice herself described the case as one “of great national importance”. The delay affected the country’s confidence in the capacity of the highest court in the land to act decisively in moments that demand constitutional clarity.
Given the broader crisis of delayed judgments across the country’s courts, many observers would reasonably expect not only contrition but also leadership. The judiciary is not dealing with an isolated incident: delays have become systemic in some divisions, undermining efficiency and confidence in the administration of justice.
A stronger statement might have included an undertaking to improve case management, prioritise timely delivery of judgments, or implement measures to ensure accountability within the courts.
In a judiciary facing mounting criticism over delayed decisions, South Africans deserve not only apologies for institutional failure, but assurances that reform will follow.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.