Show simple item record

dc.date.accessioned 2017-04-08T17:12:32Z
dc.date.available 2017-04-08T17:12:32Z
dc.date.created 2010-02-02 en
dc.identifier.citation [2010] ZACC 2
dc.identifier.citation 2010 (2) SACR 78 (CC)
dc.identifier.citation 2010 (5) BCLR 497 (CC)
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12144/3599
dc.title Moloi and Others v Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development and Others en
dc.title.alternative CCT78/09 en
dc.identifier.casenumber CCT78/09 en
dc.contributor.judge The Court
dc.date.judgment 4 February 2010
dc.link.judgment http://collections.concourt.org.za/bitstream/handle/20.500.12144/3599/Full%20judgment%20Official%20version%20%28136%20Kb%29-14976.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y
dc.concourt.synopsis Application for direct access on an urgent basis. The applicants were convicted and sentenced in a magistrate’s court for dealing in drugs. The applicants submitted that their right to a fair trial had been infringed as they were convicted on the basis of a statutory presumption which had been declared unconstitutional by this Court in a previous judgment. Pursuant to directions issued by this Court, the magistrates who presided over the trials of the applicants furnished this Court with reports stating that the applicants were not found guilty on the strength of the unconstitutional presumption, but that the charge sheets, which did refer thereto, had not been amended to reflect the true basis of their convictions. Furthermore, they drew the Court’s attention to section 86(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act which expressly states that the fact that a charge sheet is not amended shall not affect the validity of the proceedings there under. The question that stood to be answered by the Court was whether section 86(4) could be invoked where the failure to amend a charge sheet leads to the accused being prejudiced. Accordingly, the Court found that this case presented an important constitutional issue on whether the applicants were afforded a fair trial. However, the Court reiterated that it rarely exercises its power to grant direct access in cases which do not fall within its exclusive jurisdiction and stated that the High Court’s assistance in criminal matters such as this one would be of assistance to this Court. The Court found that it would not be in the interests of justice to bypass the High Court and grant direct access.
dc.concourt.casehistory Application brought on the basis of urgency for direct access to the CC to set aside the convictions and sentences imposed on the applicants by certain Magistrate's Courts, Kempton Park, in Gauteng for dealing in drugs in contravention of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ConCourt Collections


Browse

My Account