Understanding the meaning of why "judges are counter revolutionary"

It is sad that some people are not granted their right to freedom of thought and speech in this country simply because of who they support.
Yet all views deserve to be judged on merit, if any.
Thus we must resisting prejudging what comes out of the mouths of a people like the Youth League’s Julius Malema, ANC’s Gwede Mantashe, Communist Party’s Blade Nzimande and Buti Manamela.

They, too, have something to say for us to seriously think about.

In fact, most people not only disrespect their right to freedom of expression but will not even ‘entertain’ what they have to say without being preoccupied with the desire to just dismiss them as incorrigible fools. This happens simply because they have long declared their love and support for ANC president Jacob Zuma.

I found myself thinking about their common view that “judges are counter revolutionary” and realised that it is something worth … er, considering. To say “judges are counter revolutionaries” is a very sober, legitimate and well considered statement, if you think about it. I will be condemned to say that, to a large extent, I agree with these gentlemen; judges are, mostly, counter revolutionaries! Let me explain what I mean by this.

You see, judges are just ordinary people who become famous because they have been appointed judges. They are not necessarily wise even when we ordinary folks elevate their stature to that of wisest men and women among us. If you serve at the supreme or constitutional court, it does not mean that you cease being a fallible human being.
We know of many judges who served the colonial and apartheid regime to uphold an unjust, racist and oppressive legal system.

So, to be a judge, you do not need to be a moral man, for a moral man would not uphold and promote an unjust system.

Let me try and show why Mantashe et al are not necessarily wrong when they say “judges are counter revolutionaries.”

Our society is the most unequal on earth. In fact, it is an unjust society. Nobody should dispute the truth that this inequality has a lot to do with the dangerous combination of racism and capitalism. Our judges must take this into consideration when they make judgments but most of the time they carry on like we are all equal in this society.

But let me try to illustrate how judges uphold injustice and thus are “counter revolutionaries” who do not promote justice and equality in our society.

The Pan Africanist Congress maintains that some of its APLA guerillas are still in jail for having fought in the struggle to repossess the land, which they believe was stolen by whites using guns. When you listen to their case, judges have not done much to help liberate these men. But if judges were true, they should consider the fact that these men were fighting for the return of stolen land. In fact, the people who should be in jail are the ‘conquering’ land owners who stole the land in the first place. But, of course, this will never happen.

Let us forget the radical politics of the PAC, for a moment. Instead, let us talk about young thugs from Alexandra, Gugulethu, Soweto, Tembisa, KwaMashu who are in jail for robbery, theft and hijacking, for instance. These young African men will have been condemned to long stretches in jail by judges who see them as dangerous thieves. But what about the rich people who acquired their wealth and other treasures in an unjust way?

If judges were fair and just, they would send both the thieves and the rich to jail. What kind of justice do we have in this land where vulnerable thugs are sent to jail for stealing from selfish and greedy people? It is certainly unfair to young boys who face a bleak future. In fact, the judges need to focus on the people who uphold and perpetuate and unjust economic system that makes it possible for young boys to resort to crime. These rich people have made so much money for themselves and deprive so many people of money that they could share.

In fact, the mothers, aunts, sisters, fathers, brothers and uncles of these young thugs work for these rich people and never earn enough to afford a decent wage to provide for their offspring. The judges should ask why some people have so much money while the majority has nothing.

Why do judges do not seem concerned that, to quote Jamaican singer Jimmy Cliff, “too many people are suffering while too few have everything?” In fact, it is the greed of the rich that turns young boys into thieves.

Now, I don’t want people to think that I am justifying crime here. The focus is on the role and responsibility of judges in a crime ridden country.

If we are going to have judges who allow too few rich people to enjoy themselves while there are too many poor people, what justice do they stand for? We will not stop young boys from turning into thugs who break into peoples’ homes until the judges address the cause of this evil crime. The only way to stop this crime is when judges insist that the rich must be obliged to fulfill the needs of the poor. The excessive accumulation of wealth out of greed does not help man in any way. It creates envy, jealousy, rivalry and competition in society, which leads to crime and murder.

Now, back to what may be seen as the anti-judiciary argument that condemns judges.
I think what Mantashe et al mean when they say “judges are counter revolutionary” is a way of pointing out that it is not enough to tell us that we have the best constitution in the world. The constitution is, after all, just a piece of paper that does not put food on the table, for instance.

The ‘national democratic revolution’ aims to rid our society of racism, inequality, economic injustice and human greed so that we could have a society that provides a better quality life for all. If our judges are not agents that help speedily bring about such a just society, then they are not part of the solution or revolution. I think this is a rational argument, if you are willing to be open-minded and receptive.

You cannot always dismiss what Malema or Mantashe says simply because they support Zuma. We have to test the merit, if any, in some of their arguments. I understand them perfectly well when they say “judges are counter revolutionaries.” It is not enough to just confine this statement to the Zuma case. We have to apply it to the totality of the South African context..

The reality is that, yes, our law and constitution are, rightly, the best in the world. But we have far too many wrong judges who are failing to implement the law to the letter. The law prescribes equality and justice for all! Where is that in our beautiful land that the African majority does not enjoy?

You cannot be a good judge when you uphold and perpetuate an unjust economic system.
If you are judge who does not insist on equality, justice and better quality of life for all, then that simply makes you a “counter revolutionary.”

Justice has to be done to be seen.