Fakudze v S (AR410/2018) [2019] ZAKZPHC 32 (7 June 2019)

Fakudze v S (AR410/2018) [2019] ZAKZPHC 32 (7 June 2019)

The conviction for trafficking in persons was not supported by the evidence, as the appellant did not deliver, recruit, transport, or harbour the complainant for the purpose of exploitation as required by section 4(1) of the Trafficking Act. The complainant chose to follow the appellant to South Africa, and alternative options were available to her. There was no abuse of vulnerability or coercion proven. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence on count 1 were set aside. Regarding the sentence for rape, the appellant abused his position of trust as a stepfather, causing severe harm to the complainant. No substantial and compelling circumstances justified deviation from the prescribed...

Citation
[2019] ZAKZPHC 32
Parties
Appellant: Makhosini Mathews Fakudze; Respondent: The State
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Pietermaritzburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
7 June 2019
Case Number
AR410/2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence in the Regional Court, Durban
Outcome
Conviction and sentence on count 1 (trafficking in persons) set aside; conviction on count 2 (rape) confirmed; appeal against sentence on count 2 dismissed.
Judges
Poyo Dlwati, Masipa
Legal Topics
Trafficking in Persons Act, Sexual Offences, Rape, Abuse of Vulnerability, Sentencing Principles
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Trafficking in Persons Act Sexual Offences Rape Abuse of Vulnerability Sentencing Principles

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Makhosini Mathews Fakudze

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence in the Regional Court, Durban

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for trafficking in persons under section 4(1) of the Trafficking Act was supported by the evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed for rape was appropriate and justified.

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction for trafficking in persons was not supported by the evidence, as the appellant did not deliver, recruit, transport, or harbour the complainant for the purpose of exploitation as required by section 4(1) of the Trafficking Act. The complainant chose to follow the appellant to South Africa, and alternative options were available to her. There was no abuse of vulnerability or coercion proven. Accordingly, the conviction and sentence on count 1 were set aside. Regarding the sentence for rape, the appellant abused his position of trust as a stepfather, causing severe harm to the complainant. No substantial and compelling circumstances justified deviation from the prescribed...

Court Disposition

Conviction and sentence on count 1 (trafficking in persons) set aside; conviction on count 2 (rape) confirmed; appeal against sentence on count 2 dismissed.

Orders

  • The conviction and sentence on count 1 are set aside.
  • The conviction on count 2 is confirmed.