Legal battle unfolds as North West High Court scrutinises LPC's opposition to convicted rapist's advocate admission.
Image: AI Generated
The North West High Court in Mahikeng has sharply criticised the Legal Practice Council (LPC) for failing to properly explain its opposition to the admission of a man convicted of rape and robbery who is seeking to be admitted as an advocate.
Judge President Daniel Hendricks postponed the application brought by Calvin Jabulani Padi until July and ordered the LPC to provide a full explanation for its handling of the matter.
Padi approached the court seeking admission and enrolment as a legal practitioner in terms of the Legal Practice Act. Although the application was unopposed in court, judges expressed concern that the LPC, despite refusing to issue a “letter of no objection”, failed to file an affidavit or comprehensive report setting out the reasons for its position.
The court heard that Padi disclosed two serious criminal convictions in his founding affidavit: a 1992 robbery conviction and a 2002 rape conviction. He attached his criminal record and provided lengthy explanations about the circumstances surrounding both offences.
Regarding the robbery conviction, Padi claimed the offence was politically motivated during the violent clashes between supporters of the African National Congress (ANC) and the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) in the early 1990s. He told the court he and others had been instructed to hijack a BMW vehicle allegedly intended for use in attacks on hostel dwellers in Soweto. He said the group used a toy gun during the robbery and later served prison sentences after being convicted.
Padi further stated that he and his co-accused later attempted to obtain political amnesty through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process, but their application failed because they were not senior political figures and lacked sufficient evidence proving the crime was politically motivated.
Meanwhile, the rape conviction formed the central controversy in the matter. Padi told the court he was convicted alongside a co-accused in 2002 and sentenced to 16 years’ imprisonment by the Mmabatho Regional Court, with sentencing later finalised in the Mafikeng High Court.
He served more than eight years before being released on parole in 2010 due to what he described as good behaviour and completed the remainder of his sentence under community corrections supervision by December 2017.
In his affidavit, Padi attempted to portray himself as a respected businessman and community figure before his conviction. He described owning multiple hair salons, participating in political and student organisations including the Congress of South African Students and the South African Students Congress, and being involved in community initiatives and entertainment projects. He also stated that he was close to completing his LLB degree when he was arrested.
The court noted that this was not Padi’s first attempt to enter the legal profession. A previous application for admission had been unsuccessful in 2015 in a matter involving the North West Bar Association.
Despite his criminal history, the North West Bar Association issued a certificate in August 2025 stating that, to its knowledge, there was no reason why Padi should not be admitted.
However, the LPC’s handling of the application drew severe criticism from the bench. Correspondence before the court showed that the LPC’s Professional Affairs Committee initially became deadlocked over whether to support the application. The matter was then referred to the North West Provincial Council of the LPC, where a majority voted to oppose Padi’s admission application.
Yet the LPC did not place any formal reasons before the court. Instead, officials allegedly advised Padi via email to collect his file and “go argue your application in court.”
Judge President Hendricks described the LPC’s conduct as unhelpful and inappropriate for the statutory regulator of legal practitioners.
The court stressed that the LPC has a responsibility to assist courts in determining whether applicants are fit and proper persons to practise law. Hendricks said the council could not simply “leave it in the capable hands of the court” without explaining its reasoning, particularly in a matter involving serious criminal convictions.
The judges further stated that if the provincial structure of the LPC was unable to reach consensus, the matter should have been escalated to the national office for intervention or guidance.
As part of the order, the court directed the LPC’s North West Professional Affairs office to file a comprehensive affidavit within ten days explaining why no decision could be reached and why no detailed report had been provided to the court earlier. The court also ordered the matter to be referred to the national director of the LPC, who must indicate what steps will be taken regarding the application.
Copies of the judgment were also ordered to be sent to the chairpersons of the North West Bar Association and the General Council of the Bar of South Africa.
sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za
IOL News