‘SD COURT CANNOT DECIDE ON SHONGWE’S SA RELEASE CASE’

MBABANE – The Crown contends that the High Court does not have authority to conclusively decide on a matter that is pending before another jurisdiction (South Africa).

It was the Crown’s contention that the matter of Sipho Shongwe’s alleged escape from lawful custody could not be properly ventilated by the High Court, as it was still under investigation by the Hawks.
During Shongwe’s last appearance, Judge Sipho Nkosi ordered his attorney and that of the State to make written submissions in respect of the issue pertaining to his alleged erroneous/fraudulent release by authorities at the Barberton Maximum Prison on March 25, 2008.
On Thursday, Judge Nkosi is expected to make a ruling as to whether Shongwe’s release from prison was through fraudulent means or not. 

Judge Nkosi previously made it clear that in the event he finds that Shongwe was fraudulently released, he would not be admitted to bail and that would be the close of the bail hearing. The Crown, however, holds a different view as it was adamant that the court does not have the authority to deal with that aspect of the matter, as it was pending in the Republic of South Africa.

In its written submission filed yesterday, the Crown pointed out that it was common cause that the Republic of South Africa has forwarded an extradition request to the Kingdom of Swaziland, for Shongwe to come and answer on the following offences; escaping from lawful custody, forgery and uttering.
According to the State, it was also common cause that the request was pending before a court of committal in Swaziland for determination using the relevant legislation (Extradition Agreement between the Republic of South Africa and the Kingdom of Swaziland of 1962).

“It is our submission that this honourable court does not have jurisdiction to conclusively decide on a matter that is pending in another jurisdiction,” submitted the Crown.
The Crown further averred that the information before the High Court was insufficient for it to reach a just decision, as clearly it was not the trial court in respect of the offences of escaping from lawful custody, forgery and uttering.

Principal Crown Counsel Absalom Makhanya informed the court that, it was revealed in court that the original documents which were referred to by Thulani Myeni, were taken by the Hawks for further investigation. Makhanya pointed out that Myeni further explained in court that the reason he certified the copies was that the documents were required by the Royal Swaziland Police, and there were no originals.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: