S v Ntsimane
| Jurisdiction | South Africa |
| Judge | Hiemstra CJ |
| Judgment Date | 12 November 1982 |
| Hearing Date | 12 November 1982 |
| Court | Bophuthatswana Supreme Court |
Hiemstra CJ:
The accused was found guilty of possessing dagga [*] and was A sentenced to six months' imprisonment of which four months were suspended on the usual conditions. In court the accused, on being questioned in terms of Act 9 of 1981, stated the name of his supplier. The supplier had already been arrested and was the right person.
A reviewing Judge sent out the following query:
B Was the magistrate satisfied that the accused had indicated his source correctly?
If so, what action was taken against the supplier?
If the source was correctly indicated why was the sentence not wholly suspended?
The magistrate replied:
C "The court was satisfied that the accused pointed out his supplier. It however suspended the greater part of the sentence for a long period to deter the accused from indulging in such practices.
The accused's supplier was arrested and charged with dealing in cannabis."
It seems as if this magistrate has not grasped the idea of Act 9 of D 1981. The Act says it shall be a mitigating factor if the accused points out his supplier so that the supplier can be arrested and charged.
This does not imply that the mitigating effect should always go so far as justifying total suspension. There can be reasons for not suspending the whole sentence for possession. It also does not mean that, when he E refuses to reveal his supplier, there can be no suspension. There could be other mitigating features like old age and the like.
But the normal position is that, where there are no special features like previous convictions or a large quantity, the sentence is in our practice suspended wholly. It seems, from his reply, that the magistrate is not aware of this. There are no special features here, and the F accused should have received his "reward" in the form of a wholly suspended sentence.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
S v Cooper
...magistrate has however asked for general guidelines in regard to suppliers revealed in the RSA. Act 9 of 1981 contains no qualifications 1983 (2) SA p179 Hiemstra in regard to the whereabouts of the supplier and, if a court feels that on a balance of probabilities the accused has correctly ......
-
S v Mazibuko
...te wees dat die gebruik van dagga skadelik vir die mens is en dat dit as 'n sosiale euwel bekamp moet word. . . ." En in S v Ntsimane 1983 (2) SA 179 (B) op 180 word G "A dealer should however only in rare circumstances receive a wholly suspended sentence. Dealing is a serious crime which s......
-
S v Cooper
...magistrate has however asked for general guidelines in regard to suppliers revealed in the RSA. Act 9 of 1981 contains no qualifications 1983 (2) SA p179 Hiemstra in regard to the whereabouts of the supplier and, if a court feels that on a balance of probabilities the accused has correctly ......
-
S v Mazibuko
...te wees dat die gebruik van dagga skadelik vir die mens is en dat dit as 'n sosiale euwel bekamp moet word. . . ." En in S v Ntsimane 1983 (2) SA 179 (B) op 180 word G "A dealer should however only in rare circumstances receive a wholly suspended sentence. Dealing is a serious crime which s......
-
S v Cooper
...magistrate has however asked for general guidelines in regard to suppliers revealed in the RSA. Act 9 of 1981 contains no qualifications 1983 (2) SA p179 Hiemstra in regard to the whereabouts of the supplier and, if a court feels that on a balance of probabilities the accused has correctly ......
-
S v Mazibuko
...te wees dat die gebruik van dagga skadelik vir die mens is en dat dit as 'n sosiale euwel bekamp moet word. . . ." En in S v Ntsimane 1983 (2) SA 179 (B) op 180 word G "A dealer should however only in rare circumstances receive a wholly suspended sentence. Dealing is a serious crime which s......