Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:00:46Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:00:46Z
dc.date.created 2003-11-24 en
dc.identifier.citation [2002] ZACC 10
dc.identifier.citation 2002 (4) SA 858 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2002 (8) BCLR 793 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/2124
dc.title S v Singo en
dc.title.alternative CCT49/01 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT49/01 en
dc.date.hearing 12 March 2002
dc.contributor.judge Ngcobo J
dc.date.judgment 12 June 2002
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/2124/Full%20judgment%20Official%20verison%2012%20June%202002.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Validity of s 72 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act which allows for summary proceedings when accused fails to appear in court at fixed date, unless the accused can satify to the court that the failure to appear was not his/her fault. The Court examined whether s 72(4) unjustifiably limited the right to a fair trial, right to be presumed innocent and right to remain silent and what relief was appropriate. In unanimous decision by Ncgobo J found that s 72(4) did limit those rights. The Court found the limitation on the right to remain silent was justifiable, but the limitation on the right to be presumed innocent was not justifiable. As per remedy, the Court ordered s 72(4) to be read as requiring the accused to raise a reasonable possibility that the failure to comply was not due to his/her fault.
dc.concourt.casehistory Judgment in S v Singo 2002 (5) BCLR 502 (V) ; 2001 (2) SACR 576 (V) referred to Constitutional Court for confirmation proceedings.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account