A senior judge of the Western Cape High Court is facing a potential judicial misconduct inquiry after allegations that he has unlawfully occupied a state-owned residence for years after his lease expired, at a fraction of the market rental, raising fresh questions about accountability within South Africa’s judiciary.
The DA has lodged a formal complaint with the Judicial Conduct Committee (JCC) against judge Daniel Thulare, alleging that his continued stay in a government-leased house in Cape Town’s northern suburbs amounts to unlawful occupation and a breach of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Civil society watchdog Judges Matter, which monitors transparency and accountability in the judiciary, says if the judge was aware he was no longer entitled to the benefit, his prolonged occupation could constitute judicial misconduct.
According to DA member Nicholas Gotsell, who serves on the select committee for security and justice in the National Council of Provinces, Thulare’s lease on the state property expired in 2018 and was never renewed.
“As chief magistrate of Cape Town, part of his remuneration package included the use of a state house leased from the department of justice for R900 per month. When the lease expired in 2018, it was never renewed,” said Gotsell.
Thulare was appointed to the Western Cape High Court bench on January 1 2022. Gotsell argues that under the law, only the chief justice, deputy chief justice and the president of the Supreme Court of Appeal are entitled to state housing benefits.
“At the time of his appointment as a judge, his salary, benefits and designation changed. He should have vacated the property on December 31 2021, but chose not to do so,” Gotsell said.
He added that there was no valid lease agreement in place when Thulare became a judge, yet he allegedly continued to occupy the house, paying R900 a month in an area where market rentals range between R20,000 and R30,000.
“The mere fact that the judge continues to occupy the property with such impunity is an indictment on the minister of justice,” Gotsell said, adding that correspondence in 2022 between then judge president John Hlophe’s office and the department of public works and infrastructure confirmed Thulare’s occupation of the state house.
Gotsell further claims that the justice minister wrote to Thulare in March last year, giving him 30 days’ notice to vacate. More than a year later, he is allegedly still occupying the residence.
“It is shocking that he is allowed to sit in judgment of others and has not, at the very least, been suspended. What message does this send to litigants who appear before him daily?” Gotsell asked.
Mbekezeli Benjamin, research and advocacy officer at Judges Matter, confirmed that the organisation understands the complaint was submitted on January 27.
“There are no strict timelines in law, but we have consistently advocated for judicial complaints to be dealt with swiftly — not only to protect the reputation of the judiciary, but also that of the judge concerned,” Benjamin said.
In terms of section 16 of the Judicial Service Commission Act, the deputy chief justice, as acting chairperson of the JCC, must first determine whether there is a prima facie case of misconduct. The complaint is then categorised according to seriousness: lesser misconduct (Category A), serious but non-impeachable misconduct (Category B), or gross misconduct (Category C), which could lead to impeachment proceedings.
Benjamin said the matter would likely be treated as Category B, serious but not impeachable misconduct, and referred to the JCC for an inquiry, where Thulare would have an opportunity to respond.
“This appears to be the first time the JCC has dealt with a case of this nature involving state housing,” Benjamin said.
“Judges are ordinarily not provided with state-owned property. Historically, some magistrates, particularly in rural areas, have been.”
He added that if the DA’s allegations are correct and Thulare was aware from as early as 2020 that he needed to vacate the property, the continued occupation could amount to a negligent breach of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
“At this stage, it is not yet clear whether misconduct has occurred, or to what degree it may constitute. But if it is established that he knowingly continued to occupy the property without entitlement, that would raise serious ethical concerns,” Benjamin said.
The matter now rests with the Judicial Conduct Committee, whose handling of the complaint will be closely watched as a test of how the judiciary addresses allegations of impropriety within its own ranks.
Following the expiry of the lease, the continued occupation of the property has not been in terms of any policy or condition of service. Judges are not provided with state housing as part of their employment benefits
— Department spokesperson Samuel Modipane
Department of justice and constitutional development spokesperson Samuel Modipane said the department remains firmly committed to upholding the constitutional principles of accountability, transparency and the rule of law.
“At the same time, matters involving members of the judiciary must be approached with due regard for the separation of powers and the independence of the judicial arm of the state,” he said.
Modipane confirmed that the lease agreement for the residence in question had come to an end and that formal notice to vacate the property was issued, with a stipulated deadline of June 6 2025.
“Following the expiry of the lease, the continued occupation of the property has not been in terms of any policy or condition of service. Judges are not provided with state housing as part of their employment benefits,” he said.
He added that the department had, over an extended period, pursued the matter through sustained administrative engagement.
“In addition, the minister formally requested the intervention of the chief justice in the spirit of co-operative governance, with the expectation that this would facilitate an amicable resolution. Regrettably, these efforts have not yielded the desired outcome.”
Modipane said the department had now exhausted available avenues of engagement and would exercise its rights in law to ensure the matter is resolved through appropriate legal processes.
“For this reason, and to avoid prejudicing any processes that may follow, it would not be appropriate at this stage to provide details on possible financial implications to the state or on specific enforcement steps,” he said.
He stressed that the issue does not detract from the strong and constructive working relationship between the executive and the judiciary.
“Established administrative protocols and ongoing inter-institutional engagements serve as safeguards to prevent similar situations, while always respecting judicial independence.”
The ministry, he said, will allow the relevant processes to take their course and will communicate further where it is legally and procedurally permissible to do so.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.