Patel v National Director of Public Prosecutions: Johannesburg (838/2015) [2016] ZASCA 191; 2017 (1) SACR 456 (SCA) (1 December 2016)

Patel v National Director of Public Prosecutions: Johannesburg (838/2015) [2016] ZASCA 191; 2017 (1) SACR 456 (SCA) (1 December 2016)

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the double criminality rule must be satisfied at the date of the extradition request, not the date of commission of the alleged offence. The wording of the Extradition Act and the Treaty, specifically 'is punishable', refers to the present and not to past conduct. This interpretation is consistent with the purpose of extradition, reciprocity, and international cooperation in criminal matters. The applicant’s reliance on foreign and local cases interpreting the conduct date as decisive was rejected, as those decisions were based on different statutory wording. The Court further found that the certificate issued by the US authorities under section 10(2)...

Citation
[2016] ZASCA 191
Parties
Applicant: Usman Ismail Patel; Respondent: National Director of Public Prosecutions: Johannesburg
Court
Supreme Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
1 December 2016
Case Number
838/2015
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal After Dismissal of Appeal by the Gauteng Local Division of the High Court.
Judges
Maya, Pillay, Swain, Van Der Merwe, Schippers
Legal Topics
Extradition, Double Criminality, Financial Intelligence Centre Act, Treaty Interpretation, Sufficiency of Evidence
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Extradition Double Criminality Financial Intelligence Centre Act Treaty Interpretation Sufficiency of Evidence

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Usman Ismail Patel

Applicant

National Director of Public Prosecutions: Johannesburg

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal After Dismissal of Appeal by the Gauteng Local Division of the High Court.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the double criminality principle requires the conduct to be criminal in South Africa at the date of commission or at the date of the extradition request.
  2. 2 Whether the certificate issued under section 10(2) of the Extradition Act by the United States is sufficient to warrant prosecution in the foreign State.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the double criminality rule must be satisfied at the date of the extradition request, not the date of commission of the alleged offence. The wording of the Extradition Act and the Treaty, specifically 'is punishable', refers to the present and not to past conduct. This interpretation is consistent with the purpose of extradition, reciprocity, and international cooperation in criminal matters. The applicant’s reliance on foreign and local cases interpreting the conduct date as decisive was rejected, as those decisions were based on different statutory wording. The Court further found that the certificate issued by the US authorities under section 10(2)...