Usage of IsiXhosa language and phrases takes center stage post Mbenenge’s tribunal

Since the start of the tribunal probing allegations of sexual misconduct against a senior Eastern Cape judge Selby Mbenenge, the usage of the African languages and cultural context have been a prominent feature — with isiXhosa interpretation taking centre stage.

Over two weeks of testimony at the tribunal in Sandton, interpretation disputes, cultural misunderstandings, and mistranslations laid bare the ongoing struggle South Africa’s legal system faces in accommodating indigenous languages.

“Do you know what perjury is? Can you explain it? That’s not the exact meaning of it. Perjury is when you lie under oath,” said evidence leader Adv Salome Scheepers to one of the isiXhosa-speaking key witnesses, Zinhle Nkqayi.

That exchange was one of several moments during which courtroom interpretation clashed with legal nuance — highlighting the fragile intersection between language, meaning, and justice.

As witnesses delivered evidence and were cross-examined, the absence of formalised legal terminology in indigenous languages revealed glaring systemic flaws. These gaps have far-reaching implications for access to justice, particularly for South Africans whose first language is not English.

Throughout the tribunal, commonly used isiXhosa expressions — such as “hayi” — became sites of contention, often stripped of their tone or emotional weight when rendered into English.

Legal expert Mpumelelo Zikalala told YNews that when language becomes central to the facts of a case, “words are not just evidence — they are the case.”

“That becomes difficult because you then have to provide the context and add on other things that you may find that the witness did not add precisely. For example, if you use an expression and say, oho and then the question is, what did you mean by that? You and I know that’s a person exclaiming and showing a sound of not agreeing or showing nonchalance, depending on the context of what you are interpreting. So, it’s within that context in which the interpreter has got to be very alert in terms of knowing what that particular sound means, what it’s supposed to mean, and how it should be interpreted so that they convey the correct interpretation to the person who is going to take a decision.”

Cultural context also played a decisive role.

While giving his version of events, the accused judge reminded the tribunal that he is “a Xhosa man who expresses himself in isiXhosa,” stressing that his words are shaped by cultural nuance and can lose their meaning when translated too literally.

This concern resonates with broader systemic challenges.

Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB) CEO Lance Scholtz told YNews that the country’s legal system must urgently shift away from its over-reliance on English — which alienates the majority of South Africans.

“Only 8.1% of South Africans actually speak English at home. Legal Aid conducted a survey and found that 54% of criminal case applicants have either got little or zero English proficiency.”

He added that inadequate translation in legal settings often leads to miscarriages of justice:

“Often we find — and we’ve got cases — where matters are heard in English and these are translated, and often we find that there’s a violation of the human rights because the translation services were poor or inaccurate and as a result again it impinged on the rights of the person.”

Research from the Legal Resources Centre and PanSALB confirms that many people experience systemic injustice due to language barriers in court. Whether through flawed interpretation or the exclusive use of complex legal English, the consequences are real — especially for the most vulnerable.

The tribunal has served as a stark reminder: language in court is not just a tool of communication, it can also be a gatekeeper to justice.

Written by Lebohang Ndashe