JUDICIARY: SA courts buckle as judicial independence remains unfinished business, warns Chief Justice Maya

Chief Justice Mandisa Maya has raised serious concerns about the state of South Africa's judiciary, warning that despite nearly three decades of constitutional democracy, the courts remain only partially independent due to chronic underfunding, staff shortages, and failing infrastructure. Speaking at the opening of the 2026 Judiciary Conference on Tuesday, 14 July, Maya highlighted that these challenges are not merely administrative issues but constitutional failures that threaten the very foundation of access to justice. Maya addressed a gathering of judges, magistrates, and legal professionals, emphasizing that while the Constitution guarantees judicial independence, South Africa has yet to create a judiciary capable of governing and resourcing itself independently of the executive branch. She noted that the current judiciary enjoys only adjudicative independence, with institutional independence still remaining an unfulfilled goal. “Judicial officers carry the heavy burden of case adjudication, and operate in a system whose governance and resourcing, and their conditions of service, are not aligned with a single judicial authority contemplated by our Constitution,” Maya stated. Her comments came amid ongoing efforts by the government to implement legislation aimed at granting the judiciary greater control over its administration. However, Maya revealed that negotiations regarding the institutional model had encountered significant obstacles. “The pressing task now, which has hit a snag, is to agree on the institutional model and its precise terms to build the institutional, administrative, and financial systems that will give full effect to this independence,” she explained. The impact of these systemic issues is evident in courtrooms across the country, where courts are struggling with deteriorating infrastructure, inadequate support staff, unreliable digital systems, poor security, and fragmented administration. Maya described the situation as courts "cracking under the strain." She detailed how they face challenges such as failing infrastructure, inadequate translation services, limited or no research support, digital systems that do not function properly, inadequate security, inaccessible records, and administrative divisions that make accountability unclear. These deficiencies lead to delayed justice for ordinary citizens, weakening the vindication of rights and undermining public confidence in the courts. Maya emphasized that if courts cannot function effectively, the rule of law itself is compromised. A recent example of this delay is the Economic Freedom Fighters' constitutional challenge to Parliament's rejection of the Section 89 independent panel report on the Phala Phala scandal. More than a year and three months after the Constitutional Court heard arguments in the matter, a judgment has yet to be delivered. According to a paper published in the 2025 Constitutional Court Review, the apex court took an average of 214 days, about seven months, to deliver judgments in 2024. The longest wait recorded was 414 days, as reported by legal scholars Nurina Ally and Leo Boonzaier. Mbekezeli Benjamin of the judicial monitoring organization Judges Matter echoed Maya's concerns, stating that the judiciary is severely under-resourced given its extensive responsibilities. He pointed out that court infrastructure is not keeping pace with increasing demands, with some courts being too small to handle rising caseloads, resulting in further delays. Benjamin added that judicial capacity in terms of personnel is lagging behind, noting there has been no increase in judicial posts since 2009. This lack of growth exacerbates the existing workload and contributes to the backlog of cases. Meanwhile, the National Treasury has not allocated additional resources to address these growing challenges, leaving the judiciary to manage with dwindling resources and mounting pressure. As discussions continue around the future structure of the judiciary, the need for immediate action becomes increasingly urgent. Without substantial improvements in funding, staffing, and infrastructure, the promise of judicial independence outlined in the Constitution risks remaining an aspirational goal rather than a realized reality.