South Africa Case Law

Director of Public Prosecutions and Another v Netshidzivhe and Others (HCAA 08/2024)

Director of Public Prosecutions and Another v Netshidzivhe and Others (HCAA 08/2024) [2025] ZALMPPHC 20 (10 February 2025)

Court

Limpopo High Court, Polokwane

Case number

HCAA 08/2024

Judges

Pillay AJ, Mashamba AJ, Nkoana AJ

The court held that the requirements in paragraph 12 of the entrapment application form are not statutory requirements under section 252A of the Criminal Procedure Act. Non-compliance with section 252A affects only the admissibility of evidence, which is a matter for the criminal trial court, not for review under PAJA. The decision to prosecute is specifically excluded from the definition of administrative action in PAJA and is only reviewable on grounds of legality and rationality, not under PAJA. The court a quo erred by usurping the powers of the criminal trial court and by granting orders…

Source excerpt

• Entrapment
• Review Of Prosecutorial Decisions
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Promotion Of Administrative Justice Act
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 252a

Rangaka and Another v S (A10/2016)

Rangaka and Another v S (A10/2016) [2017] ZAFSHC 59 (31 March 2017)

Court

Free State High Court, Bloemfontein

Case number

A10/2016

Judges

Daffue, Mene

The court found that the contradictions in the State witnesses' evidence were not material and did not undermine the reliability of the prosecution's case. The evidence, when considered in its totality, established a consistent thread implicating the first appellant in the offence of corruption. The trap set by the police was authorized and did not go beyond providing an opportunity to commit the offence; the evidence obtained was admissible and did not render the trial unfair. The appellant's version was found to be improbable and not reasonably possibly true, particularly regarding the circ…

Source excerpt

• Corruption
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 252a
• Trap Evidence
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Contradictory Witness Testimony

Myoli and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions, Eastern Cape and Others (593/2014)

Myoli and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions, Eastern Cape and Others (593/2014) [2015] ZAECBHC 33 (22 September 2015)

Court

Eastern Cape High Court, Bhisho

Case number

593/2014

Judge

Alkema

The court held that section 252A of the Criminal Procedure Act does not infringe the right to a fair trial as protected by the Constitution. The section provides an exclusionary rule that ensures evidence obtained through traps or undercover operations is only admissible if it does not render the trial unfair or is not detrimental to the administration of justice. The tension between public interest in combating crime and the accused's constitutional rights is recognized and resolved through section 36, which allows for reasonable and justifiable limitations. The applicants failed to identify…

Source excerpt

• Entrapment
• Fair Trial Rights
• Exclusionary Rule
• Limitation Of Rights
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 252a

S v Galekwakweng (19/2012)

S v Galekwakweng (19/2012) [2013] ZANWHC 9 (7 February 2013)

Court

North West High Court, Mafikeng

Case number

19/2012

Judges

GURA, R.D HENDRICKS

The High Court dismissed a stock-theft appeal, holding that the police trap was lawful, the informer need not be called, and the single witness was reliable.

• Stock Theft
• Police Trap
• Single Witness Rule
• Hearsay Evidence
• Criminal Procedure Act Section 252a
• Stock-theft