{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017743080198722498, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.320754716981132, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Delay in delivering judgment or a case of “washing” judicial “dirty linen in public”? Reflections on Myaka v S

As much as it is difficult to categorise the judgment of the Full Court of the South Gauteng High Court in the recent case of Myaka and Others v S, it is, in pith and substance, a case involving the conduct of judges in adjudication brought to the fore in a somewhat bizarre manner. Myaka did not involve those familiar problems encountered in decided cases such as whether, owing to the participation of the judge in the hearing of the case, a party's right to a fair hearing might have been so compromised as to raise the question of the judge's impartiality. It did not involve the question of whether the exchanges between the bench and the bar were in contravention of the right to a fair hearing, or of a judge descending into the arena of conflict. The issue was not that the judge had muddled the evidence to the extent that his/her views overshadowed the facts of the case, some of which issues afflicted the trial judgment in Bula v Minister of Home Affairs. Bula clearly concerned the very poor performance of the judge in the proceedings in court. Myaka, on the one hand, raises the issue of dereliction of duty on the part of a judge of a Full Bench of the High Court and, on the other, the propriety of the other two members of that Bench for bringing that issue to public attention.