Thozamile Semekazi: Admits Lying to Judicial Conduct Tribunal

• Registry clerk Thozamile Semekazi admitted lying under oath about phone calls with Judge Belinda Hartle's journalist husband during a Judicial Conduct Tribunal.
• Semekazi initially denied contact with Ray Hartle but later confessed to initiating and lying about three calls, citing safety concerns.
• The tribunal is investigating Semekazi's allegation that Judge Hartle used a racial slur and swore at him, which the judge denies, though she admits to using a swear word not directed at Semekazi.
• Judge Hartle's legal team suggested Semekazi's complaint was retaliation for an article by Ray Hartle reporting bribe allegations against Semekazi.
• A court operations director testified that Semekazi initially reported insults from the judge but did not mention a racial slur.

Registry clerk Thozamile Semekazi, who brought serious racism allegations against High Court Judge Belinda Hartle, has now conceded to providing false testimony under oath before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal.

Registry clerk Thozamile Semekazi, who brought serious racism allegations against High Court Judge Belinda Hartle, has now conceded to providing false testimony under oath before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal. This significant admission came during the ongoing proceedings, where Semekazi initially denied any communication with Ray Hartle, Judge Hartle's journalist husband, prior to the publication of an article. However, following a consultation with evidence leader advocate Benny Kalakgosi, Semekazi confirmed that he had indeed lied about three phone calls with the journalist, even admitting to initiating the first of these calls in March 2024.

Semekazi explained his untruthful statements by citing safety concerns. Despite this admission of perjury, retired Justice Boissie Mbha, presiding over the tribunal, ruled that recordings of these phone calls could not be presented as evidence, even in a private session, on the grounds that Semekazi was considered a whistleblower. The tribunal is investigating Semekazi's claim that Judge Hartle used a racial slur, the "k-word," and swore at him in May 2025, an accusation Judge Hartle vehemently denies, though she admits to using a swear word out of frustration over late documents, clarifying it was not directed at Semekazi.

During cross-examination, advocate Jan Heunis, representing Judge Hartle, pressed Semekazi regarding his characterization of the judge as a racist who should not hold office in a democratic South Africa, as stated in his complaint to the Judicial Service Commission. Heunis highlighted that Judge Hartle's husband, Ray Hartle, is a black man, and that the couple married in the same year that laws prohibiting interracial relationships were lifted, having met when such unions were still unlawful. Heunis further described Judge Hartle as a highly respected individual known for her kindness and generosity.

Semekazi, however, maintained that he had no prior knowledge of the judge, asserting that their first encounter was on the day of the alleged racist incident. He declared, "It was not my first time working with a white judge like her ... It was my first time to work with a judge who was racist," and firmly stated he would "never change" his view regarding her being "trapped in a racist past." The proceedings themselves faced disruption when "death threats" against Semekazi appeared on the livestream, leading to a delay, though Semekazi expressed his willingness to continue with the cross-examination despite these safety concerns.

Further inconsistencies emerged through the testimony of Denim Kroqwana, the director of court operations in the Eastern Cape. Kroqwana recounted that on the late afternoon of May 15, Semekazi visited his office in distress, reporting that Judge Hartle had hurled insults at him. Notably, Kroqwana stated that Semekazi did not mention any racial slur during this initial report. Following this, both men proceeded to the judge's office with the intention of "resolving things."

Judge Hartle's legal team has posited that Semekazi's complaint might be an act of retaliation. This theory suggests the complaint arose after Ray Hartle, the judge's husband, published an article detailing an anonymous allegation that Semekazi had solicited bribes, an accusation Semekazi has denied. Additionally, Heunis questioned Semekazi about a letter sent to the Judicial Services Commission, which objected to a proposal for both parties to undergo polygraph tests. Heunis suggested the letter appeared to be "written by someone with legal training," a claim Semekazi refuted, insisting he drafted it independently on his computer and accusing Heunis of "undermining" him. Semekazi was later excused from the afternoon session due to feeling unwell.

This case highlights the critical importance of witness credibility and the severe repercussions of perjury in judicial conduct tribunals, even when allegations involve serious matters like racism. Lawyers involved in such proceedings must rigorously vet witness statements and advise clients on the absolute necessity of truthful testimony, as false statements can undermine the entire case and lead to further legal complications.

Source: Based on recent tribunal reporting.