FIRST COMPLAINT AGAINST WAGLAY JP

December 2025

1. A scan of Brink's first complaint against Waglay JP with Rawlins's confirmatory affidavit, June 2017. For the clearest resolution and easiest reading, the final PDF of the complaint before it was printed and signed.

2. Acknowledged, August 2017.

3. Waglay JP's response, June 2018.

4. Brink's invited comments on it, July 2018.

5. On 31 January 2025, after four successive appeals to the Chief Justice and former Deputy Chief Justice at the time to see to the decision of the complaint, and more than seven-and-a-half years since it was filed, a final demand addressed to JSC chairperson Mandisa Maya CJ that the complaint be decided at last.

6. A fortnight later, the JSC secretary reports that she found the decision of the complaint in the complaint file, and sends Patricia Goliath DJP's undated decision dismissing the complaint.

7. Brink's appeal notice in PDF as submitted (webpage version). Delivered and acknowledged, 12 March 2025. Minor correction noted.

8. Brink's submissions on his appeal, in PDF as submitted (webpage version). Delivered and acknowledged on 19 June 2025, ahead of the Judicial Conduct Committee ('JCC') Appeal Committee's consideration of the case on 10 July.

9. A PAIA request on 31 July for the identities of the judges who considered the case; PoD. Illegally refused, so a complaint to the Information Regulator ('IR') on 8 September; PoD. Acknowledged next day. Under investigation per letter from IR on the 29th. Before the result:

10. On 19 December 2025, the Appeal Committee unanimously upholds the appeal -- not on the merits, but on the technical ground raised in the appeal that the complaint had been dealt with under the wrong section of the JSC Act. The complaint is referred back to the JCC for decision under section 17. Under subsection (4)(c), the investigating judge may 'recommend to the Committee, to recommend to the Commission that the complaint should be investigated by a Tribunal.' As it obviously must be. Let's see.

***