Judicial Independence and Separation of Powers in South Africa and Zimbabwe: A Comparison through Selected Case Law
Paul T. Mtunuse 
Issue: Vol.6 No.11 Article 9 pp. 2836 – 2842
DOI: https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.20256119 | Published online 28th October, 2025
© 2025 The Author(s). This is an open access article under the CCBY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
The purpose of the paper was to explore the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers in South Africa and Zimbabwe. The article used doctrinal research methodology to analyse existing primary and secondary data sources. The study argued that judicial independence and separation of powers, if observed, make a democracy in a state successful and strengthen the rule of law. The controversial issue is whether there is no judicial overreach when the courts preside over cases involving the executive and parliament. This often leads to another controversy of who should judge disputes, where the judiciary is alleged to have overstepped its powers by the other arms of government. The three arms of government are equal. The study submitted a finding that each arm of government must ensure that it does not overstep and interfere with the authority of the other two organs of government. The paper concludes that impartiality of the courts and separation of powers are observed in some cases in South Africa and Zimbabwe. However, in some instances, there had been debates about whether the courts had overstepped their powers. In contrast, interference with judicial independence had been alleged in other cases. The researcher recommends that all three arms of government should keep to their lanes. The study contributes to scholarship because it cautions against either judicial overreach or interference with judicial independence.
Keywords: Independence of the Judiciary, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Judicial Overreach, Arms of Government.
Legislation
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 1996.
The Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 20) Act 2013.
Cases
Catholic Commission for Justice & Peace, Zimbabwe v A-G Zimbabwe 1993 (4) SA 239 (ZSC).
Commercial Farmers Union v Minister of Lands, Agriculture and Resettlement 2000 2 ZLR 469 (SC).
Commercial Farmers Union v Minister of Lands, Agriculture and Rural Resettlement 2010 (2) ZLR 576 (SC).
Government of the Republic of South Africa v Grootboom 2000 (11) BCLR 1169 (CC).
Hlophe v Judicial Service Commission [2022] 3 All SA 87 (GJ).
Judicial Service Commission v Romeo Taombera Zibani [2017] ZWSC 68.
Minister of Health v Treatment Action Campaign 2002 (5) SA 721 (CC).
President of the Republic of South Africa v South African Rugby Football Union 2000 (1) SA 1(CC).
S v Dodo 2001 (5) BCLR 423 (CC).
Soobramoney v Minister of Health, KwaZulu-Natal 1997 (12) BLCR 1696 (CC).
South African Association of Personal Injury Lawyers v Heath 2001 (1) BCLR 77 (CC).
Zibani v JSC [2016] ZHHC 797.
Books and Articles
Bekink, Bernard. Principles of South African Local Government Law. Elsevier Butterworth Heinemann, 2006.
Chiduza, Lovemore. “Towards the Protection of Human Rights: Do the New Zimbabwean Constitutional Provisions on Judicial Independence Suffice?” Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad 17, no. 1 (2014): 368–418.
Cilliers, Yolandi. “Finding a Balance Between Judicial Activism and Judicial Deference.” University of Pretoria, 2014.
Currie, Iain, eds, Johan de Waal, Pierre de Vos, Karthy Govender, and Heinz Klug. “‘Judicial Authority,.’” In The New Constitutional & Administrative Law. Juta Academic, 2001.
Devenish, George E. A Commentary on the South African Constitution. Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998.
Dube, Felix. “Separation of Powers and the Institutional Supremacy of the Constitutional Court over Parliament and the Executive.” South African Journal on Human Rights 36, no. 4 (October 1, 2020): 293–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954.
Hosten, Willy J. Introduction to South African Law and Legal Theory. Butterworths, 1995.
Makama, Saul Porsche. Constitutionalism and Judicial Appointment as a Means of Safeguarding Judicial Independence in Selected African Jurisdictions. University of South Africa (South Africa), 2012.
Nicholson, R.D. “Judicial Independence and Accountability : Can They Co-Exist?” The Australian Law Journal 67, no. 6 (June 1, 1993): 404–26.
Nwafor, Anthony O. “The Lesotho Constitution and Doctrine of Separation of Powers: Reflections on the Judicial Attitude.” African Journal of Legal Studies 6, no. 1 (2013): 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1163/17087384-12342020.
Venter, Francois. Constitutional Comparison: Japan, Germany, Canada and South Africa as Constitutional States. BRILL, 2021.
Vos, Pierre De, and Warren Freedman. “‘Basic Concepts of Constitutional Law,.’” In South African Constitutional Law in Context. Oxford University Press, 2021.
Paul T. Mtunuse (LLD) is a Senior Lecturer & Non-Examining Chairperson (NEC), Research & Higher Degrees, School of Law, Faculty of Law, Humanities and Social Sciences at Walter Sisulu University, and an Advocate of the High Court of South Africa. His research interests include International Human Rights Law, Constitutional Law, Child Law, Interpretation of Legal Instruments, Labour Law, Cyber Law, Artificial Intelligence Law and Medical Law.
Mtunuse, Paul T. “Judicial Independence and Separation of Powers in South Africa and Zimbabwe: A Comparison through Selected Case Law.” E-Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences 6, no. 11 (2025): 2836 – 2842, https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.20256119.
© 2025 The Author(s). Published and Maintained by Noyam Journals. This is an open access article under the CCBY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
