S v Botha en Andere (1)

JurisdictionSouth Africa

S v Botha en Andere (1)
1995 (2) SACR 598 (W)

1995 (2) SACR p598


Citation

1995 (2) SACR 598 (W)

Court

Witwatersrandse Plaaslike Afdeling

Judge

Myburgh R

Heard

September 11, 1995

Judgment

September 11, 1995

Counsel

W H Trengrove SC (bygestaan deur M R Hellens) namens beskuldigde nr 1; J L C J Van Vuuren namens beskuldigde nr 2; Etienne du Toit SC namens beskuldigde nr 3
J S M Henning SC (bygestaan deur I M Lindeque) namens die Staat

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

B Fundamentele regte — Reg op 'n billike verhoor — Artikel 25(3) van Grondwet 200 van 1993 — Artikel 215(b) van Grondwet bepaal dat Polisiediens misdrywe of beweerde misdrywe moet ondersoek — In casu C grootste deel van ondersoek gedoen deur Eskom ondersoekdiens — Reg op billike verhoor omvat ook wat in voorverhoor-fases gebeur — Doel van art 215 nie om iemand wat nie lid van Polisiediens is, te belet om aan ondersoek van misdaad deel te neem nie — Heelparty privaat instansies doen eie ondersoek voor resultate aan Polisiediens oorhandig word — Geen skending van beskuldigde se reg op 'n billike verhoor. D

Headnote : Kopnota

Na sluiting van die Staatsaak in 'n verhoor op verskeie aanklagte, het beskuldige 3 aansoek om ontslag gedoen. Namens die beskuldigde is aangevoer dat art 215 van die Grondwet 200 van 1993 bepaal dat die Suid-Afrikaanse Polisiediens die taak het om misdrywe, en beweerde E misdrywe, te ondersoek. Geen ander instansie besit hierdie bevoegdheid nie. Aangesien die oorgrote meerderheid van die ondersoek in casu deur Eskom se ondersoekdiens verrig is, is aangevoer dat die beskuldigde se reg op 'n billike verhoor, in terme van art 25(3) van die Grondwet, geskend is.

Die Hof het in die eerste plek bevind dat die vereiste van 'n billike verhoor die gevolg het dat getuienis wat voor 'n strafverhoor F onreëlmatiglik verkry is, ontoelaatbaar is. Die Hof moes voorts beslis of die beskuldigde 'n billike verhoor kon geniet in die lig van die feit dat feitlik die geheel van die ondersoek nie deur die polisie gedoen is nie. Die reg op 'n billike verhoor is só geïnterpreteer as om ook in te sluit dit wat in die voorverhoor-fases gebeur. Indien die Hof dus sou bevind dat onreëlmatighede plaasgevind het tydens die ondersoek van die saak, sou dit beteken dat die beskuldigde se reg op 'n billike verhoor aangetas is. G Artikel 215 van die Grondwet se doel was nie om iemand wat nie 'n lid van die polisiediens is, te belet om deel te neem aan die ondersoek van misdaad nie. Die samelewingsopset is hedendaags van gespesialiseerde aard en geen polisiediens kan alle misdaad alleen ondersoek en bekamp nie. Heelparty privaat instansies doen hulle eie ondersoek in aangeleenthede wat hulle raak. Eers daarna word die resultate aan die Polisiediens H oorhandig. Die Hof het op die feite bevind dat Eskom geen onreëlmatigheid gepleeg het nie. Daar kon ook geen afleiding gemaak word dat Eskom se ondersoekdiens bevooroordeeld en partydig was nie. Die Hof het derhalwe beslis dat daar geen skending was van die beskuldigde se reg op 'n billike verhoor nie. Die aansoek om ontslag is van die hand gewys.

Flynote : Sleutelwoorde

Fundamental rights — Right to a fair trial — Section 25(3) of Constitution Act 200 of 1993 — Section 215(b) of Constitution providing that police service to investigate crimes or alleged crimes — In casu major part of investigation done by Eskom investigation service — Right to fair trial J also including what happens in pre-trial phases — Intention

1995 (2) SACR p599

A of s 215 not to prevent someone who is not member of police service from investigating crime — Many private instances conducting own investigation before results handed to police service — No breach of accused's right to a fair trial.

Headnote : Kopnota

After conclusion of the State's case in a trial on charges of various B counts, accused number 3 made an application for his discharge. It was contended on behalf of accused number 3 that s 215 of the Constitution Act 200 of 1993 provided that the South African Police Service was entrusted with the task of investigating crimes and alleged crimes. No other instance possessed this authority. As the greater part of the investigation in casu had been carried out by Eskom's investigation service, it was contended that the accused's right to a fair trial in C terms of s 25(3) of the Constitution had been breached.

The Court held firstly, the requirement of a fair trial had as a result that evidence which had been irregularly obtained before the trial was inadmissible. The Court was further required to determine whether the accused could have a fair trial in the light of the fact that virtually all the investigation had not been performed by the police. The right to a fair trial was interpreted in such a way as to include also that which D happened in the pre-trial phases. If the court thus found that irregularities happened during the investigation of the trial this would mean that the accused's right to a fair trial had been breached. The intention of s 215 was not to prevent someone who was not a member of the police service from investigating a crime. Modern society was so specialised that no police service could by itself investigate and prevent all crime. Many private bodies did their own investigation in matters E which affected them. Only then were the results handed to the police service. The Court found on the facts that Eskom had committed no irregularities in the course of the investigation and the inference could also not be drawn that Eskom's investigation service had acted with prejudice. The Court accordingly held that there had been no breach of the accused's right to a fair trial. The application for discharge was F accordingly dismissed.

Case Information

Aansoek om ontslag aan die einde van die Staat se saak in 'n straf verhoor.

W H Trengove SC (bygestaan deur M R Hellens) namens beskuldigde nr 1. G

J L C J Van Vuuren namens beskuldigde nr 2.

Etienne du Toit SC namens beskuldigde nr 3.

J S M Henning SC (bygestaan deur I M Lindeque) namens die Staat. H

Judgment

Myburgh R: Inleiding

Nadat die Staat sy saak gesluit het, het mnr Etienne du Toit SC namens beskuldigde 3 aansoek gedoen vir beskuldigde 3 se ontslag op alle aanklagte op sekere grondwetlike gronde.

Beskuldigde 3 se betoog

I Die betoog van mnr Du Toit kan soos volg saamgevat word:

Artikel 5(c) van die Polisiewet 7 van 1958 ('die Polisiewet') het bepaal dat die werksaamhede van die Suid-Afrikaanse Polisie onder meer die ondersoek...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • S v Dlamini; S v Dladla and Others; S v Joubert; S v Schietekat
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...from the dock. [115] The challenge has elicited considerable judicial comment: See eg S v Botha and Others 1995 (11) BCLR 1489 (W); 1995 (2) SACR 598 (W); S v Nyengane en Andere 1996 (2) SACR 520 (E); S v Aimes and Another 1998 (1) SACR 343 (C); S v Chavulla en Andere 1999 (1) SACR 39 [116]......
  • Intelligence-led policing - a proactive approach to combating corruption
    • South Africa
    • SA Crime Quarterly No. 2015-52, June 2015
    • 1 June 2015
    ...African Banking Risk Information Centre, interview, 8 May 2014.36 SAPS Sandton 441/04/2013, SCCC88/2013.37 State v Botha and other (1) 1995 (2) SACR598 (W).38 State v Dube 2000 (1) SACR53 (N).39 Constitution of South Africa 1996 (Act 108 of 1996), Pretoria: Government Printer.40 State v Bot......
1 cases
  • S v Dlamini; S v Dladla and Others; S v Joubert; S v Schietekat
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...from the dock. [115] The challenge has elicited considerable judicial comment: See eg S v Botha and Others 1995 (11) BCLR 1489 (W); 1995 (2) SACR 598 (W); S v Nyengane en Andere 1996 (2) SACR 520 (E); S v Aimes and Another 1998 (1) SACR 343 (C); S v Chavulla en Andere 1999 (1) SACR 39 [116]......
1 books & journal articles
  • Intelligence-led policing - a proactive approach to combating corruption
    • South Africa
    • SA Crime Quarterly No. 2015-52, June 2015
    • 1 June 2015
    ...African Banking Risk Information Centre, interview, 8 May 2014.36 SAPS Sandton 441/04/2013, SCCC88/2013.37 State v Botha and other (1) 1995 (2) SACR598 (W).38 State v Dube 2000 (1) SACR53 (N).39 Constitution of South Africa 1996 (Act 108 of 1996), Pretoria: Government Printer.40 State v Bot......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT