Judge Selby Mbenenge Faces Mounting Scrutiny in Sexual Harassment Tribunal
The Judicial Conduct Tribunal’s probe into claims against Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge keeps gaining intensity. After several days of pointed testimony, the process hit pause in July and is set to pick up again in late October. At stake? The professional reputation of one of the country’s top judges, and the wider public’s trust in the judiciary.
None of this drama started quietly. The central accusation comes from Andiswa Mengo, a long-serving High Court secretary. She alleges that between 2021 and 2022, Judge Mbenenge repeatedly crossed the line—from unwanted advances and suggestive emoji exchanges, right up to a confrontation where she claims the judge exposed himself. One small but heavily debated detail: Mbenenge sent a syringe emoji, which he insists referenced his own medical treatments related to a health condition, but which Mengo interpreted with suspicion given the wider context of their chat history.
During a tense cross-examination, led by evidence leader Salome Scheepers, Mbenenge pushed back hard. He called her style ‘malicious persistence’ and demanded concrete proof, particularly regarding allegations of explicit photos. “Give me specific dates,” he pressed, repeatedly denying anything more suggestive than the disputed emoji. Scheepers admitted the evidence trail from WhatsApp messages wasn’t complete enough to prove Mbenenge definitively sent indecent images. Yet she maintained the judge’s credibility had suffered due to several inconsistencies and the unusual tone of the communication records.
There’s another layer here—legal jockeying that extends far beyond Mbenenge and Mengo. The Judicial Service Commission (JSC), which typically suspends judges facing such intense public accusations, chose not to bench Mbenenge during the investigation. That move, announced back in February 2024, broke tradition and caused ripples across legal circles, with critics claiming it risked undermining faith in the courts. Meanwhile, Mbenenge switched roles from accused to accuser, opening a crimen injuria case against Mengo for distributing their private WhatsApp chats to others and, by extension, the broader legal community. The case highlights how personal boundaries and expectations of privacy become blurred in judicial power structures.
Next Steps: October Arguments Bring Clarity—or More Questions
The tribunal proceedings aren’t a quick affair. After July’s adjournment, both legal teams are preparing to deliver their closing oral arguments on 21 and 22 October. These final sessions are expected to be tough, with both sides picking apart not just the explicit accusations, but the nuances of evidence, memory, and professional conduct. The tribunal is set to weigh not just who said what, but what the gray areas in chat logs and in-person interactions reveal about power, boundaries, and credibility.
While the case unfolds in headlines, it’s reshaping conversations within South Africa’s legal world about how such complaints are handled and judged. Judges aren’t often put on the defensive under public gaze, but the unusual circumstances around Mbenenge’s suspension—or lack thereof—have already set a precedent that will get more attention no matter the tribunal’s final verdict.
