Recent Case: General principles and specific offences

• Citation: (2023) 36 SACJ 304
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v36/i2a6
• Published date: 14 November 2023
• Pages: 304-316
• Author: Anderson, A.
• Date: 14 November 2023

General principles and specic

offences

ADRIAAN ANDERSON

University of Limpopo

1 General principles

1.1 Robbery – common purpose

Common purpose has become, and remains, a salient feature of South

African cri minal law, which is evident from its application in all the

cases under discussion in th is issue. The following maxim is used to

overcome difculties relating to causation where multiple offenders

are involved: Where two or more people, having a common purpose

to commit a crime, act together to achieve that purpose, the conduct

of each of them in the execution of that purpose is i mputed to the

others. (SV Hoctor Snyman’s Crimin al Law 7ed (2020) 226) There are

two categories of common purpose, the prior agreement form, and the

active association form. Our courts, regrettably, do not always indicate

what form they rely upon. For a critical evaluation of this principle, see

M Watney ‘Rising of the tide of crime control: the doctrine of common

purpose in persepective’ (2020) 4 TSAR 623 where she discusses the

historical origins of the doctrine, the developments through S v Pheto e

2018 (1) SACR 593593 (SCA) and S v Tshabalala 2020 (2) SACR 38

(CC) and also the application of similar doctrines in various other

jurisdictions before coming to the conclusion that

‘A proper application of the principles of participation will not only simplify

the criminal law, but also entirely avoid application of the doctrine in its

active association form and only allow application of its prior agreement

form in circumstances where it is absolutely necessary and appropriate’

(Watney at 650).

The matter of S v Gumbi ((CC24/2003) [2023] ZAKZPH 64 (13 June

2023)), involved a gang of men who armed themselves with rearms

with the aim of committing robbery of a business premises. Upon

entering the store they proceeded to rob customers and staff. The

court held that ‘the agreement to achieve this goal, aided by the use of

RECENT CASES

https://doi.org/10.47348/SACJ/v36/i2a6

304

(2023) 36 SACJ 304

© Juta and Company (Pty) Ltd