RACISM CHARGE : Court clerk was in tears after alleged insult by Judge Hartle, witness tells tribunal

A senior court official has told the Judicial Conduct Tribunal investigating allegations of racism against Eastern Cape High Court Judge Belinda Hartle that a court clerk approached him in tears after allegedly being insulted by the judge.Denim Kroqwana, the director of court operations in the Eastern Cape Office of the Chief Justice, took the stand on Thursday, 12 November, and testified that Thozamile Semekazi approached him crying on 15 May 2025, shortly after an alleged confrontation with Hartle.His testimony comes after days of cross-examination in which Hartle’s lawyer, advocate JC Heunis SC, questioned Semekazi’s credibility, including why the alleged racial slur was only mentioned in a police complaint nearly a month after the incident.Kroqwana, who was among the first officials to whom Semekazi reported the incident, said the clerk told him that Hartle had insulted him when he went to deliver case files to her office.He said he accompanied Semekazi to Hartle’s office to address the matter, but she had already left.Evidence leader advocate T Kalakgosi asked Kroqwana why he had accompanied Semekazi and whether this was normal procedure.Kroqwana replied that it was, “So that we can try and ensure that we restore the working relations between the two of them and that the matter is talked about and resolved.” Asked whether this was standard practice, he replied, “That’s what I do.”However, the matter was not immediately resolved because Semekazi was subsequently booked off sick.“Upon his return to work, I never had an opportunity to talk to him about this,” Kroqwana testified.Kalakgosi asked why Kroqwana had not approached Hartle the following day to establish what had happened.“I couldn’t do that in the absence of Mr Semekazi because the intention was to have both of them under one roof,” he explained.Kroqwana said he may, however, have briefly mentioned the incident to Hartle when they bumped into each other. “I might have met her in the passage and mentioned that there is this incident, but unfortunately Mr Semekazi is booked off, but once he is back, I would come and see her,” he said. The Judicial Conduct Tribunal is investigating allegations of gross misconduct against Eastern Cape High Court Judge Belinda Hartle. (Photo: South African Judiciary / Facebook) Kroqwana said he did not pursue the case further even after Semekazi returned to work because a formal complaint had since been lodged.During earlier cross-examination, Heunis questioned why statements from other court employees, including a supervisor to whom Semekazi reported the incident, made no mention of the alleged racial slur.Tribunal blocks recordings Earlier on Thursday, the tribunal heard that Semekazi had admitted making a telephone call to Judge Hartle’s husband, Ray Hartle, a journalist, in March 2024, despite previously denying initiating contact with him.The admission followed a ruling directing Kalakgosi to listen to three recordings in Semekazi’s presence and consult him about their contents.Kalakgosi said Semekazi had acknowledged initiating the first conversation, while the other two were initiated by Ray Hartle. He explained that Semekazi had initially denied making the call because of concerns about his safety.“An issue of safety was raised as a result of why he initially said that he never initiated a phone call with Mr Hartle,” said Kalakgosi.Ray and Belinda Hartle in 2024. (Photo: Ray Hartle / Facebook) Kalakgosi argued that the recordings were not relevant to the alleged racist incident of 15 May 2025, but requested that they be played behind closed doors should the tribunal decide to hear them.Tribunal president, retired Supreme Court of Appeal Judge BH Mbha, refused to allow the recordings to be played, even behind closed doors, after accepting that Semekazi had acted as a whistleblower.“The issue of a whistleblower did arise in the course of yesterday, and it, I must confess, did worry me, but now it is clear. He did so as a whistleblower. My view is that it would be totally irresponsible, totally irresponsible, of me to allow even an in camera listening of this recording,” said Mbha. He also prohibited the defence from cross-examining Semekazi on the contents of the recordings, which he said were irrelevant to the allegations before the tribunal. ‘Fundamentally wrong’Heunis objected, arguing that the recordings were important in testing Semekazi’s credibility, particularly because he had initially denied making the call.“The witness never claimed to be a whistleblower. You don’t know, Sir, whether he did that during the conversations,” said Heunis.He also argued that Semekazi had denied the contents of a Daily Maverick article published on 5 May 2025, just 10 days before the alleged incident.“If it hadn’t been for the fact that the tapes exist and had come to the fore, you would have continued living under the lie that he told in that regard,” Heunis told the tribunal.He described the ruling as “fundamentally wrong” and asked that his objection be formally recorded.‘Peace offering’The tribunal also revisited the issue of a box of rusks that Hartle allegedly left for Semekazi as a peace offering following their confrontation.Semekazi had interpreted the gesture as an attempt to bribe him. During Wednesday’s cross-examination, Heunis put it to him that the peace offering mentioned in a WhatsApp message was actually rusks.On Thursday, however, Mbha questioned why the rusks were absent from the tribunal's court papers.“I was just surprised to hear rusks, because I had read the papers. I could not recall seeing rusks anywhere,” said Mbha.Heunis confirmed that neither Semekazi’s complaints nor Hartle’s written responses identified the peace offering as rusks, adding that Hartle was not facing a charge of attempted bribery. Hartle faces allegations of gross misconduct after Semekazi – a court official with more than 20 years of experience – accused her of repeatedly swearing at him and using a racial slur during the 15 May incident.Through her legal team, Hartle admitted to using the f-word, though her counsel maintained it was directed at the office handling the files rather than at Semekazi.Her defence has suggested that the racial slur allegation was fabricated, arguing that the delay in reporting it and its omission from earlier witness accounts cast doubt on Semekazi’s version of events.The tribunal continues on Friday, 13 November. DM