Thozamile Semekazi was cross-examined before the Judicial Conduct Tribunal on Wednesday. Photo: The South African Judiciary/Facebook
- Lawyers for the Eastern Cape judge accused of racism want audio recordings of conversations between her accuser and her husband to be heard by the Judicial Conduct Tribunal.
- Judge Belinda Hartle’s lawyers said on Wednesday that her accuser, registry clerk Thozamile Semekazi, had several conversations with her husband, journalist Ray Hartle.
- Semekazi was one of two Mthatha High Court officials named in an article by Hartle, which reported that he had been accused in an anonymous letter of soliciting bribes to file documents.
- Semekazi has denied having the conversations with Ray Hartle.
Lawyers acting for Eastern Cape Judge Belinda Hartle, who is accused of racism, want the Judicial Conduct Tribunal sitting in Sandton to hear audio recordings of conversations between her accuser and the judge’s husband, journalist Ray Hartle.
Hartle is accused of swearing at and using the “k-word” to registry clerk Thozamile Semekazi.
Previously, advocate Jan Heunis, acting for the judge, suggested that Semekazi’s complaint was rooted in a “reprisal” for an article on corruption at the Mthatha High Court written by Ray Hartle and published in the Daily Maverick on 5 May 2025.
Semekazi was one of two Mthatha High Court officials named in the article, which reported that he had been accused in an anonymous letter of soliciting bribes to file documents. He denied this at the time.
Ten days after the article was published, on the afternoon of 15 May, Semekazi went to the office of Judge Hartle’s secretary to deliver case flow management files which, he concedes, were late.
He alleges that the judge, in front of her secretary, Shakira Frost, launched into an angry tirade, in which she said “f*** you”, “p**s man” and “bleddy fucking k….s”.
Hartle denies this. She admits saying she was tired of being “f*****d around” by people in the general office, a comment for which she immediately apologised and apologised for again in WhatsApp messages to Semekazi that afternoon and the following day.
In his evidence and under cross-examination, Semekazi denied knowing who Ray Hartle was at the time when the article was published. He said he had only spoken to him after publication, when Hartle phoned him, and had only “recently found out” the connection between him and the judge.
However, Heunis put to him that, in fact, he had called Hartle unsolicited in March 2024, wanting to discuss something “secret” with him.
Heunis said Ray Hartle had then twice phoned Semekazi in September 2024 and February 2025.
He said Ray Hartle had recorded these conversations. Heunis told the tribunal that he had only become aware of this on Tuesday and he had not expected Semekazi’s denials.
Semekazi repeatedly said the conversations had never happened. He said the allegation that the initial call had been made from his number was only made by Heunis during the tribunal’s proceedings on Tuesday, after Semekazi had written down his number for the tribunal.
Heunis, however, maintained that he already had the number. He said the call to Ray Hartle had come from a “private number” — from someone not listed in Hartle’s contacts — but the number of the caller had come up on his phone, and he had then used TrueCaller to verify it.
Arguing that the recordings should be made available to the tribunal, Heunis said there were “mutually destructive” versions of what occurred in Frost’s office on 15 May.
He said it was “vitally important” to establish whether or not Semekazi was “a truthful witness”.
“His credibility is a pivotal issue. The recordings will show that he lied.”
Evidence leader advocate Benny Kalakgosi objected, describing this as an “ambush” and raising the issue of the authenticity of the recordings.
Tribunal president Justice Boissie Mbha ruled that Kalakgosi must consult with Semekazi, go through the recordings with him, and then make further submissions on the issue.
Later in the day, Heunis questioned Semekazi about the “peace offering” Hartle, in one of the WhatsApp exchanges, said she had left on his desk. Semekazi had previously testified that he had not seen it and did not know what it was, but he considered it to be a “bribe”.
Heunis told the tribunal: “It was a packet of rusks.”
The hearing continues.
© 2026 GroundUp. This article is published under the GroundUp Republication Licence Version 1.0. Email [email protected] to request permission to republish.
