Mathekga and Another v S (717/2019) [2020] ZASCA 77; [2020] 3 All SA 681 (SCA) ; 2020 (2) SACR 559 (SCA) (30 June 2020)

Mathekga and Another v S (717/2019) [2020] ZASCA 77; [2020] 3 All SA 681 (SCA) ; 2020 (2) SACR 559 (SCA) (30 June 2020)

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellants, both experienced police officers, acted outside the scope of section 49(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act when they opened fire on two fellow officers, resulting in death and injury. The court held that there was no objective or subjective justification for the use of deadly force, as the supposed suspects posed no threat and were not reasonably suspected of a crime involving serious bodily harm. The trial court's finding of direct intent to kill was upheld, and the argument that the appellants were merely negligent was rejected. On sentencing, the court found that the trial court had materially misdirected itself by applying section...

Citation
[2020] ZASCA 77
Parties
Appellant: Mmereki Welcome Mathekga; Appellant: Johannes Thulani Mngomezulu; Respondent: The State
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
30 June 2020
Case Number
717/2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence partially upheld.
Judges
Cachalia, Mocumie, Makgoka, Mokgohloa, Dlodlo
Legal Topics
Murder, Minimum Sentences, Use of Deadly Force, Criminal Procedure Act, Culpable Homicide, Sentencing Guidelines
Criminal Law Murder Minimum Sentences Use of Deadly Force Criminal Procedure Act Culpable Homicide Sentencing Guidelines

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 5 Authorities cited 46 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mmereki Welcome Mathekga

Appellant

Johannes Thulani Mngomezulu

Appellant

The State

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Johannesburg

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants objectively and/or subjectively believed their actions were justified by section 49(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.
  2. 2 Whether the appellants were aware that the deceased was a police officer for the purposes of section 51(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997.
  3. 3 Whether the effective sentence of fifteen years’ imprisonment imposed on the appellants was appropriate in the circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal found that the appellants, both experienced police officers, acted outside the scope of section 49(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act when they opened fire on two fellow officers, resulting in death and injury. The court held that there was no objective or subjective justification for the use of deadly force, as the supposed suspects posed no threat and were not reasonably suspected of a crime involving serious bodily harm. The trial court's finding of direct intent to kill was upheld, and the argument that the appellants were merely negligent was rejected. On sentencing, the court found that the trial court had materially misdirected itself by applying section...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence partially upheld.

Orders

  • The appeal on the conviction of murder in respect of both appellants is dismissed.
  • The appeal on sentence in respect of each appellant succeeds to the extent that the sentence is reduced.