Matitwane v Regional Court President and Another (CA20/2017) [2017] ZANWHC 71; 2018 (1) SACR 209 (NWM) (23 November 2017)

Matitwane v Regional Court President and Another (CA20/2017) [2017] ZANWHC 71; 2018 (1) SACR 209 (NWM) (23 November 2017)

The court found that the Regional Court Magistrate acted unlawfully and grossly irregularly by cancelling the applicant's bail mero motu without an application or evidence under oath, as required by Section 68(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The Magistrate's actions were not authorised by any statute and were biased, as the applicant was not afforded the opportunity to be heard. The cancellation was based on unfounded fears and did not consider the applicant's actual circumstances. The court held that the bail cancellation was invalid and ordered its reinstatement.

Citation
[2017] ZANWHC 71
Parties
Applicant: Mthandazo Matitwane; Respondent: Regional Court President; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecution
Court
North West High Court, Mafikeng
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
23 November 2017
Case Number
CA20/2017
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Review of Bail Cancellation Order
Outcome
Application for review granted; bail cancellation order set aside; bail reinstated.
Judges
A M Kgoele, Samkelo Gura
Legal Topics
Bail Cancellation, Review of Magistrate Decision, Gross Irregularity, Audi Alteram Partem, Criminal Procedure Act Section 68
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Bail Cancellation Review of Magistrate Decision Gross Irregularity Audi Alteram Partem Criminal Procedure Act Section 68

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mthandazo Matitwane

Applicant

Regional Court President

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecution

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Review of Bail Cancellation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Regional Court Magistrate acted lawfully in cancelling the applicant's bail mero motu without an application or evidence under oath.
  2. 2 Whether the cancellation of bail was grossly irregular and biased.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's bail should be reinstated.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Regional Court Magistrate acted unlawfully and grossly irregularly by cancelling the applicant's bail mero motu without an application or evidence under oath, as required by Section 68(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The Magistrate's actions were not authorised by any statute and were biased, as the applicant was not afforded the opportunity to be heard. The cancellation was based on unfounded fears and did not consider the applicant's actual circumstances. The court held that the bail cancellation was invalid and ordered its reinstatement.

Court Disposition

Application for review granted; bail cancellation order set aside; bail reinstated.

Orders

  • The order of the Regional Court Magistrate dated 12 May 2016 cancelling the applicant's bail is reviewed and set aside.
  • The bail of the applicant is reinstated.