President Ramaphosa Appoints Two New Justices to South Africa’s Constitutional Court Bench

Justices Dambuza,Mayosi and Katharine Savage join South Africa’s apex court, creating a historic female majority despite record appointment delays.

By: AXL Media

Published: Apr 10, 2026, 9:11 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from Eyewitness News

A Historic Shift Toward Gender Parity in the Judiciary

The appointment of Justices Nambitha Dambuza,Mayosi and Katharine Savage marks a transformative moment for the South African legal landscape, establishing the Constitutional Court as one of only four women,majority apex courts globally. Advocacy group Judges Matter noted the immense symbolic weight of this development, pointing out that in 1994, only two out of more than 100 judges in the country were women. This milestone coincides with the 70th anniversary of the 1956 women’s march, framing the appointments as a significant advancement for representation within the nation's highest legal body.

Decades of Judicial Experience Join the Apex Court

Both appointees bring extensive benches of experience to their new roles, having served the South African judiciary for over a decade. Justice Dambuza,Mayosi has been a member of the Supreme Court of Appeal since 2015 and has previously held the position of acting judge president. Justice Savage transitions from the Western Cape High Court, where she has served since 2015, and brings recent expertise from her 2024 appointment to the Labor Appeal Court. President Ramaphosa emphasized that both jurists possess a deep commitment to the constitution and a track record of dedicated service.

Concerns Over Record Breaking Appointment Delays

Despite the positive reception of the candidates themselves, the administrative timeline leading to their selection has drawn sharp criticism from legal watchdogs. Judges Matter highlighted that the 184,day wait for these appointments represents the longest delay in the democratic era of South Africa. This period of vacancy has raised questions about the efficiency of the executive’s judicial selection process. The delay has been characterized by observers as a missed opportunity for swifter reinforcement of the court’s capacity.