E astern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge has been found guilty of misconduct by a Judicial Service Commission (JSC) tribunal, but the ruling stopped short of declaring his actions gross misconduct—allowing him to remain in office.

The tribunal concluded that Mbenenge violated the judicial code of conduct through inappropriate behavior, including a flirtatious relationship with a court secretary. However, it found that the conduct did not meet the threshold required for impeachment.

Importantly, Mbenenge was cleared of sexual harassment, bringing to a close a high-profile inquiry that has drawn intense public and legal scrutiny over standards of professional conduct within South Africa’s judiciary.

The case stemmed from a complaint by Andiswa Mengo, a judges’ secretary, whose allegations triggered a landmark tribunal process examining the boundaries of judicial ethics, power dynamics in the workplace, and accountability at the highest levels of the bench.

Following the ruling, lawyers representing Mengo said the tribunal’s finding nonetheless vindicates her position. They argued that the outcome affirms that Mbenenge’s conduct was “improper,” even if it was not deemed severe enough to warrant his removal from office.

The tribunal’s decision underscores a critical distinction in judicial discipline: while misconduct may warrant censure or corrective measures, only gross misconduct can justify impeachment under constitutional standards.

The ruling effectively ends the proceedings against Mbenenge, confirming that he will continue serving as Judge President of the Eastern Cape. At the same time, the decision is likely to fuel ongoing debate about ethical accountability, workplace conduct, and the adequacy of existing disciplinary thresholds within the judiciary.