S v Maqam (R86/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 325 (18 November 2021)

S v Maqam (R86/2021) [2021] ZAFSHC 325 (18 November 2021)

The accused's statement did not admit or provide facts regarding when the blood specimen was drawn or whether it was drawn within two hours of the alleged offence, as required by section 65(3) of the National Road Traffic Act. The absence of these admissions or supporting evidence means the presumption of guilt cannot operate. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice, and the court should have entered a plea of not guilty in terms of section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The conviction, sentence, and related orders must be set aside and the matter remitted for proper procedure.

Citation
[2021] ZAFSHC 325
Parties
Applicant: The State; Respondent: Thabile Maqam
Court
Free State High Court, Bloemfontein
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
18 November 2021
Case Number
R86/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Review / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act
Outcome
Conviction, sentence, and order set aside; matter remitted for proper procedure.
Judges
Molitsoane, Daniso
Legal Topics
Driving Under Influence, National Road Traffic Act, Presumptions of Fact, Plea Procedure, Jurisdictional Facts
Criminal Law Driving Under Influence National Road Traffic Act Presumptions of Fact Plea Procedure Jurisdictional Facts

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Applicant

Thabile Maqam

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Review / Special Review Under Section 304(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused admitted all jurisdictional facts required for conviction under section 65(2)(a) of the National Road Traffic Act.
  2. 2 Whether the blood specimen was drawn within two hours of the alleged offence as required by section 65(3) of the Act.
  3. 3 Whether the proceedings were in accordance with justice given the absence of admissions or evidence on essential facts.

Ratio Decidendi

The accused's statement did not admit or provide facts regarding when the blood specimen was drawn or whether it was drawn within two hours of the alleged offence, as required by section 65(3) of the National Road Traffic Act. The absence of these admissions or supporting evidence means the presumption of guilt cannot operate. The proceedings were not in accordance with justice, and the court should have entered a plea of not guilty in terms of section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The conviction, sentence, and related orders must be set aside and the matter remitted for proper procedure.

Court Disposition

Conviction, sentence, and order set aside; matter remitted for proper procedure.

Orders

  • The conviction, sentence and order made in terms of section 35(3) of the National Road Traffic Act, 93 of 1996 are hereby set aside.
  • The case is remitted to the court a quo to enable it to act in terms of section 113 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977.