In February, South Africa’s Judicial Service Commission conducted interviews for the next legal giant who would descend upon the seat of Chief Justice in the Constitutional Court. As the highest court in the land, the Constitutional Court has been symbolised as a beacon of hope for those who occupy the margins and also as a site for transformation and justice. Thus, it is quite apt in South Africa that the dislocation between hope and reality would occur as the single woman candidate for the job was subject to a familiar line of questioning solely reserved for women. The patriarchy effectively reduced President Mandisa Maya to a figure sitting prettily on her impressive accolades. As the President of the Supreme Court of Appeal, President Maya can be described as a harbinger in the legal fraternity who constantly pushes for the inclusion, training and growth of young Black women in the space. In the words of Prof Pumla Gqola, “Yet, in a context where women’s leadership is always under question, meritocratic promise collides with toxic masculinity in an attempt to cut down even the most exceptional achievers.” 

Almost 30 years into South Africa’s democracy, the question of whether the nation is ready for a female Chief Justice can only be categorised as an unremarkable and uninventive show of thinly veiled misogynoir. This indirectly calls to question women’s capacity to lead and sit at the helm of the highest court in the land. Maya rightfully dismissed this question as inappropriate only to be accosted by Commissioner Mpofu’s utterance which was soaked in sexual innuendo. The interview took on a nauseating never-ending merry-go-round focused on her gender and capacity to lead. The Minister of Justice, Ronald Lamola asked whether Maya was standing for Chief Justice on her own merits and not simply because she is a woman. The acts of paternalism became blatant with the Commissioners commenting on the extraordinariness of Maya’s ability to have achieved her success juxtaposed to her small frame. Commissioner Dodovu added, “I am trying to think of a woman who has risen to such majestic heights of success like you. I’m very much impressed, I must say and I very much hope that young women of this country will look at you, try to emulate your examples and vision which is very important in the context of our country.” This utterance is an example of a compliment that is seeped in condescension. We should be well past the “first woman” accolade being labelled as an honour; this accolade should heighten awareness of the fact that South Africa’s transformation project is failing Black women. Societal notions of women’s incapacity to lead and the call for adherence to the restrictive patriarchal scripts seemed to have seeped into the interview.

South African Municipalities Leaving Women in Informal Settlements Behind

From the onset, the list Maya faced centred on gender and almost placed an unfair burden on her to resolve issues around sexual harassment within the judiciary as well as cases of gender-based violence. While a woman needs to spearhead movements that will develop policy around women-specific issues and ensure the implementation of equitable education for young Black women in the judiciary, it is quite alarming that this became central to her interview. While these questions were posed to her male counterparts, there were auxiliary questions that highlighted their actual capacity to sit in this position. Of course, Maya did not shy away from her disappointment in the lack of a sexual harassment policy and other gender-specific issues that plague the judiciary. Contrasting the interview with the other three male candidates, it was a disservice for Maya to have been subjected to a softball interview.

The question of transformation in South Africa has been poorly answered and implemented regarding gender. If anything, it appears that gender transformation is merely an operation of window dressing and ticking boxes without the structural issues being adequately addressed. Paternalism, misogynoir and heteropatriarchy place Black women in positions of leadership as either formidable and resilient or incapable and inferior should they dare bend and snap. Black women in the judiciary have disrupted the boys club” of the legal fraternity which places them under a microscope where failure will be met with lashings of incompetence. Judge Masipa, the presiding officer in the Oscar Pistorious case was constantly under siege with her capacity and qualifications being called into question. This was undoubtedly a display of how the transformation project has failed Black Women as the litany of insults directed towards the Judge were informed by misogynoir. In sentencing, the athlete who is alleged to have shot and killed his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp, a publication referred to the reasons behind her judgement as “nothing short of untenable, flimsy and frankly bewildering.”

South African Minister: Black Judges Are “mentally colonised”

Journalist Zukiswa Pikoli adequately points out the subtle sexism that reared its ugly head in the JSC interview writing, “Rising to a particularly high office as a woman is seen to be more exceptional than a natural ascription of high-functioning, intelligent and sharp-minded person invoking unwanted and unwarranted scrutiny or patronising patting on the head.” 

While the JSC made a recommendation to the President of South Africa that Maya should be appointed as the Chief Justice, the entire process exposed the condition of Black women in South Africa. This is a condition of constant scrutiny and anticipation of failure that tests the mental and physical wellbeing of Black women leaders who have to navigate through their roles while trying to steer clear of a collision caused by a patriarchal system.