Shongwe said the Law Society has acted unprofessionally in the manner in which it handled the complaints by the lawyers about the Chief Justice, Michael Ramodibedi. He said the Law Society did not take the interests of clients seriously when they engaged in the boycott. His main complaint is that the clients have paid the lawyers to represent them in their cases but they have abandoned their responsibilities and decided to persue their own interests.
“The Law Society has acted unprofes-sionally in the handling of this issue. It did not take the concerns of its clients into consideration. The clients have paid them a lot of money to represent them in their cases but they have failed them. I pass a vote of no confidence on the Law Society,” said Shongwe, in a state of anger.
Shongwe complained that he has his own matter which is pending at the High Court but he does not know what is happening to it because of the boycott. He insists that if the lawyers had a problem with the CJ, they should have approached the King to inform him as he is the one who employed Ramodibedi.
“The CJ is working here in Swaziland and he was hired by the King. If the lawyers were thinking correctly, they should have gone to the King to report him. Maybe the King would have brought him to order or he would have fired him,” he continued.
Shongwe sympathised with criminal suspects who are languishing behind bars yet they have paid lawyers to represent them in their cases.
Lastly, Shongwe wondered how the lawyers are going to repay their clients for all that they have done to them.
“How are they going to repay us for the sufferings we have gone through? Are we to move an urgent application at the High Court compelling them to pay us? How do they think they will survive with what they have done to us?” he asked.
The Chairman of the Law Society Committee, Zweli Jele, has regretted the situation which their clients have found themselves in. Jele said, however, they would rather refund their clients and remain bankrupt than to take their cases to what he termed ‘a slaughterhouse’ of a court.
http://liarcatchers.com/civil_investigations.html
“It is regrettable that our clients are now suffering. However, the boycott is aimed at fixing the courts so that our clients can get justice. It would be wrong to take our clients to a court that cannot give them justice. We would rather refund them and be bankrupt than to go to a court that is a slaughterhouse,” he said.
