Wickham v Magistrate, Stellenbosch and Others (CCT118/16) [2016] ZACC 36; 2017 (1) BCLR 121 (CC) ;2017 (1) SACR 209 (CC) (25 October 2016)

Wickham v Magistrate, Stellenbosch and Others (CCT118/16) [2016] ZACC 36; 2017 (1) BCLR 121 (CC) ;2017 (1) SACR 209 (CC) (25 October 2016)

The Constitutional Court held that the applicant's rights as a victim were adequately addressed through extensive participation in the prosecution process, including opportunities to make representations and attend proceedings. The Victims' Charter confers a general right to participate, but this is not absolute and does not grant standing to challenge plea and sentence agreements unless there was a failure to afford reasonable opportunity for representations. The exercise of the right to present evidence or a victim impact statement is subject to the court's discretion under section 105A(7)(b)(i)(bb) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The Magistrate's refusal to accept the applicant's...

Citation
[2016] ZACC 36
Parties
Applicant: Wayne Anthony Wickham; Respondent: Magistrate, Stellenbosch; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape; Respondent: Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development; Respondent: Annika Slabbert
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 October 2016
Case Number
CCT 118/16
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court After Dismissal by High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judges
Mogoeng, Nkabinde, Cameron, Froneman, Jafta, Khampepe, Madlanga, Mhlantla, Musi, Zondo
Legal Topics
Victims Charter, Victim Impact Statement, Judicial Discretion, Plea and Sentence Agreement, Standing, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Victims Charter Victim Impact Statement Judicial Discretion Plea and Sentence Agreement Standing Promotion of Administrative Justice Act

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

Parties

Wayne Anthony Wickham

Applicant

Magistrate, Stellenbosch

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions, Western Cape

Respondent

Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development

Respondent

Annika Slabbert

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Constitutional Court After Dismissal by High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant, as a victim, had standing to challenge the plea and sentence agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the Magistrate's refusal to accept the victim impact statement or oral evidence constituted a reviewable irregularity.
  3. 3 Whether victims have an absolute right to participate in criminal proceedings under the Victims' Charter and section 105A of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The Constitutional Court held that the applicant's rights as a victim were adequately addressed through extensive participation in the prosecution process, including opportunities to make representations and attend proceedings. The Victims' Charter confers a general right to participate, but this is not absolute and does not grant standing to challenge plea and sentence agreements unless there was a failure to afford reasonable opportunity for representations. The exercise of the right to present evidence or a victim impact statement is subject to the court's discretion under section 105A(7)(b)(i)(bb) of the Criminal Procedure Act. The Magistrate's refusal to accept the applicant's...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.