Malema ordered to apologise to Judge Matojane and JSC by 30 September
Malema ordered to apologise to Judge Matojane & JSC after Parliament’s Powers and Privileges Committee resolved that EFF leader Julius Malema must formally tender an apology in the National Assembly by 30 September 2026.
The matter stems from questions Malema asked Judge Elias Matojane during a Judicial Service Commission interview in 2021. The dispute has since moved through Parliament’s ethics processes and the courts, eventually resulting in a renewed deadline for the EFF leader to apologise to both Judge Matojane and the Judicial Service Commission.
The decision places renewed attention on parliamentary ethics, the responsibilities of members serving on the Judicial Service Commission and the consequences of failing to comply with resolutions adopted by the National Assembly.
Malema has indicated that he intends to apologise and has asked for arrangements to be made for the apology to take place in the House before the deadline.
Julius Malema apology ordered by Parliament
The Julius Malema apology follows a lengthy process involving Parliament’s Ethics Committee, the National Assembly, the Western Cape High Court and the Committee on Powers and Privileges.
Malema was referred to the Powers and Privileges Committee after failing to comply with an earlier instruction requiring him to apologise in the National Assembly.
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza referred the matter for consideration after the apology had not been entered within the previous timeframe.
Committee chairperson Weziwe Tikana-Gxotiwe said Malema had been asked to respond in writing to allegations relating to possible contempt of Parliament.
According to the committee, Malema responded on 11 August and indicated that he would apologise to Judge Matojane and the Judicial Service Commission.
He also asked the committee chairperson to provide a date on which the apology could be formally tendered.
The committee subsequently resolved that the apology must be made in accordance with the National Assembly resolution adopted following the earlier ethics findings.
The deadline has now been set for no later than 30 September 2026.
Judge Elias Matojane and the 2021 JSC interview
The controversy involving Judge Elias Matojane dates back to April 2021, when Judicial Service Commission interviews were held for appointments to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
At the time, Matojane was a Gauteng High Court judge seeking appointment to the higher court.
Julius Malema was serving as a member of the Judicial Service Commission and questioned Matojane during the interview process.
The questioning included reference to a ruling involving the EFF and former finance minister Trevor Manuel.
The court ruling had ordered the EFF to pay Manuel R500,000.
The exchange during the interview later became the subject of a complaint to Parliament’s Ethics Committee.
Lawson Naidoo, the executive secretary of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution, lodged the complaint.
The complaint resulted in a parliamentary investigation into whether Malema’s conduct had breached the ethical standards expected of members of Parliament.
Judicial Service Commission complaint and ethics findings
The Judicial Service Commission plays a crucial role in South Africa’s constitutional system by participating in the appointment of judges and dealing with matters relating to the judiciary.
Because of the importance of the JSC’s work, the conduct of commissioners during judicial interviews is subject to significant public and institutional scrutiny.
Parliament’s Ethics Committee considered the complaint relating to Malema’s conduct.
In November 2021, the committee found that Malema had violated provisions of the Code of Ethical Conduct and Disclosure of Members’ Interests.
The committee recommended that he formally apologise in the National Assembly to both Judge Elias Matojane and the Judicial Service Commission.
The National Assembly subsequently adopted the committee’s report and recommendations.
This made the requirement for the apology an official parliamentary resolution.
Malema challenges the decision in court
Malema later challenged the parliamentary decision.
In February 2022, he launched a review application in the Western Cape High Court.
The application sought to challenge the decision requiring him to apologise.
However, the court dismissed the review application in May 2025.
According to the findings referred to in the parliamentary process, the court concluded that Malema’s grounds of review were without merit.
The dismissal meant that the original requirement for a formal apology remained in place.
National Assembly sets new deadline
The National Assembly again addressed the matter after Malema did not enter the apology within the earlier deadline.
Speaker Thoko Didiza had previously directed that the apology should be made in the House.
A deadline was initially set for February 2026.
However, the apology was not tendered within that period.
The matter was subsequently referred to Parliament’s Powers and Privileges Committee.
The committee examined the circumstances surrounding the failure to comply with the National Assembly resolution.
Chairperson Weziwe Tikana-Gxotiwe said Malema was given an opportunity to provide a written response.
Malema later confirmed that he intended to apologise.
The committee has now directed that the apology must be entered in the House no later than 30 September 2026.
Malema has also been instructed to make the necessary arrangements with the Speaker’s office.
What the deadline means
The deadline means that Malema is expected to formally address the matter in the National Assembly.
The apology must be tendered to Judge Elias Matojane and the Judicial Service Commission in accordance with Parliament’s resolution.
The issue also highlights the authority of parliamentary committees and the National Assembly to enforce decisions relating to members’ conduct.
Failure to comply with parliamentary resolutions can lead to further proceedings, including matters involving EFF Parliament contempt allegations.
The Powers and Privileges Committee was specifically asked to consider Malema’s failure to comply with the earlier instruction.
EFF Parliament contempt concerns
The EFF Parliament contempt issue emerged after Malema failed to enter the apology within the earlier timeframe.
Parliament’s rules and procedures provide mechanisms for dealing with members who fail to comply with official instructions or resolutions.
The Powers and Privileges Committee was therefore tasked with considering the matter after the Speaker’s referral.
Malema’s written response became an important part of the process.
By indicating that he would apologise, Malema effectively confirmed his intention to comply with the outstanding parliamentary instruction.
The committee nevertheless decided that a clear deadline was necessary.
The 30 September 2026 deadline is therefore intended to bring the matter to a conclusion.
Sinawo Thambo also ordered to apologise
The same parliamentary process has also affected another EFF member.
EFF MP Sinawo Thambo has been ordered to tender an apology in the National Assembly on a separate matter.
The complaint against Thambo was lodged by former DA chief whip George Michalakis.
The matter was referred to the Powers and Privileges Committee after an affidavit supporting the complaint was submitted by DA MP Kevin Mileham.
Thambo was asked to provide a written response to the allegations.
According to the committee, his version of events differed from that of the complainant.
However, Thambo expressed regret for any offence caused.
The committee resolved that he should apologise to Mileham in the House by 30 September 2026.
Thambo has also been instructed to make the necessary arrangements with the Speaker’s office.
The fact that both Malema and Thambo are expected to apologise on the same day could make 30 September a significant date for parliamentary proceedings involving the EFF.
Why the case is important
The case involving the Julius Malema apology is significant because it raises questions about parliamentary accountability and the conduct of politicians involved in judicial appointment processes.
Members of the Judicial Service Commission have considerable responsibility because their decisions and questioning can influence public confidence in South Africa’s judiciary.
The matter also demonstrates the role played by Parliament’s Ethics Committee in investigating complaints against MPs.
The subsequent court challenge further illustrates how parliamentary decisions can be tested through the judicial system.
However, once the Western Cape High Court dismissed Malema’s review application, the parliamentary resolution requiring an apology remained in force.
The latest decision by the Powers and Privileges Committee is intended to ensure compliance with that resolution.
YOU MAY LIKE:
Conclusion
Malema ordered to apologise to Judge Matojane & JSC marks the latest development in a dispute that began during a Judicial Service Commission interview in 2021.
The EFF leader must now formally apologise in the National Assembly no later than 30 September 2026.
The matter arose from questions directed at Judge Elias Matojane during his interview for appointment to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
Parliament’s Ethics Committee found that Malema had violated provisions of the Code of Ethical Conduct and recommended that he apologise.
Malema later challenged the decision in court, but his review application was dismissed.
After failing to comply with an earlier deadline, the matter was referred to the Powers and Privileges Committee.
Malema has since indicated that he will apologise, and Parliament has now set a final deadline.
The case remains an important example of parliamentary accountability, the authority of the Judicial Service Commission and the consequences surrounding EFF Parliament contempt concerns.
With the deadline approaching, attention will now turn to whether Julius Malema formally tenders the required apology in the National Assembly by 30 September 2026.
References from Mainstream Media
- IOL – Malema ordered to apologise to Judge Matojane and JSC by September 30
Read the full IOL report - News24 – Malema in trouble in Parliament for flouting five-year-old order to apologise to judge
Read the full News24 report - Eyewitness News – Julius Malema agrees to formally apologise to Judge Matojane in Parliament
Read the full Eyewitness News report - Parliament of South Africa – Speaker notes court order relating to sanctions against Julius Malema
Read Parliament’s official statement
Support Independent Journalism with eKayNews! 📰✨
At eKayNews, we are dedicated to bringing you honest, independent, and reliable news. But we can’t do it alone—independent journalism relies on the strength and generosity of its community.
If you value our work, please consider supporting us today! You can help keep us going by choosing a subscription or simply buying us a one-off virtual coffee:
👉 Support us here: ekaynews.co.za/subscribe-form/
You can also support our mission by visiting our main site at www.ekaynews.co.za and following @eKayNews on all social media platforms.
Thank you so much for your incredible generosity and for being part of our journey! 🙏💙
