In a country where 1/4 of the men admit to being rapists, Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng is probably not the worst person there. But he has to be the worst Chief Justice of any country on the planet.
Mogoeng Mogoeng was appointed by Nelson Mandela as a judge of the North West High Court. Then Jacob Zuma, the ANC’s president, appointed him Chief Justice. Zuma had been on trial for rape, so you could see why he wanted a rape friendly Chief Justice.
But Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng wasn’t just friendly to rapists. He’s friendly to child rapists.
The South African Litigation Centre has put together a research document listing a number of court cases in which Mogoeng has found surprising mitigating factors in cases of rape and attempted rape of children.
In the former Bophuthatswana High Court in 2005, Mogoeng reduced from five years’ to three years’ imprisonment the sentence of a man who had attempted to rape a seven-year-old girl. Among the factors he considered in reducing the sentence were that the accused was 30 years old and a first-time offender, married with two children and a soldier who earned R1 800 a month. He did not explain the relevance of these factors.
While he accepted that the girl’s vagina had been penetrated, he found that it was not known whether this was with the man’s penis or his finger, as her dress had covered her face.
So Mogoeng Mogoeng isn’t just a pedophile’s dream. He’s also the ACLU’s dream judge. But it gets worse. So much worse.
Mogoeng said: “The complainant is seven years old and the injury she sustained is not serious. She sustained a bruise on her vestibule. Although there was no direct evidence led, she must have suffered some psychological trauma as a result of this incident.”
Not serious at all. In another child rape case, South Africa’s Chief Justice reduced a sentence for “substantial and compelling circumstances” t
These were that “the appellant is 31 years of age, he is unmarried, he is unemployed, he is suffering from chronic epilepsy, his highest qualification is standard seven and he is staying with his unemployed mother”.
In another case, Mogoeng wrote,
“One can safely assume that [the accused] must have been mindful of [the victim’s] tender age and was thus so careful as not to injure her private parts, except accidentally, when he penetrated her. That would explain why the child was neither sad nor crying when she returned from the shop, notwithstanding the rape. In addition to the tender approach that would explain the absence of serious injuries and the absence of serious bleeding, he bought her silence and cooperation with Simba chips and R30.”
Yes, Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng just described the rape of a child as “tender” and stated that injuries resulting from the rape were “accidental”.
And it gets still worse…
In his judgment Mogoeng also said: “[The victim] claims that the sexual intercourse was very painful but there was clearly nothing about her to suggest that she was in any pain when she arrived home — There is no mention of limping or crying or anything of the kind, notwithstanding the complainant’s assertions that she was heartbroken and limping as a result of the sexual intercourse.”
It would be a mistake to assume that Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng is some sort of horrible lunatic. He made these decisions before being nominated as Chief Justice. And these decisions did not prevent him from becoming Chief Justice.
There is a reason why South Africa has such horrifying rape rates, particularly the rape of children. It’s because such behavior is considered normative by African National Congress leaders.
The President of South Africa is a rapist. His Chief Justice finds excuses for child rapists. This isn’t mere chaos. It’s corruption of the sickest and deepest form.
South Africa is a rape haven because it’s run by rapists and the associates of rapists. Child rape is common there for the same reason that it’s common in Afghanistan.
Given the pain, the deprivation and the dehumanization that the apartheid system was intended to cause and did in fact bring about, it is of great importance that we do everything within our power as South Africans of all races, to avert the dangers that a disguised protection of white male privilege, at the expense of opening up opportunities for women and black men, is loaded with.
When black men and women of all races were appointed to higher courts for the first time, those opposed to change voiced a concern about the so-called lowering of standards. The same argument has changed tag a bit, lately. It was initially said that there was no commitment by the JSC to gender representation.
Suddenly, it changed to the alleged bias against white men. Some of the advocates of gender representation even nominated and openly fought for the appointment of a white man and inexplicably jettisoned their campaign for gender representation. When “unwanted” white males were appointed they were labelled executive-friendly.
I have come to challenge you and other genuinely progressive bodies to resist all efforts geared at the protection white male dominance in the professions and the Bench and the equation of the appointment of black and women practitioners to the institutionalization of mediocrity.
And yes, in case you’re wondering, Chief Justice Tender Rape was also unqualified for his post. An ANC appointee unqualified? Next thing you’ll tell me he doesn’t even know sign language.