Dewani trial: Did the NPA exercise due diligence?
09 December 2014
The DA will write to the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, Michael Masutha and Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, Mathole Motshekga, requesting that the portfolio committee launch a review of the state and effectiveness of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) given the judgment handed down yesterday in the Dewani case.
This comes after reports allege that an excess of R5 million was spent to extradite and try Shrien Dewani for the murder of his wife in Cape Town four years ago.
Judge Traverso found, under section 174 of the Criminal Procedures Act (CPA), that the prosecution did not supply enough, credible evidence to support its case. Section 174 of the CPA stipulates that "if, at the close of the case for the prosecution at any trial, the court is of the opinion that there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence referred to in the charge or any offence of which he may be convicted on the charge, it may return a verdict of not guilty."
Indeed it is unusual to make credibility findings at this stage of the prosecution. Furthermore, Judge Traverso granted a section 174 despite a lengthy extradition hearing which demonstrated a prima facie case.
In the state's protracted efforts and spending to get Dewani to return to South Africa to stand trial, it would appear that the NPA indeed did not have a solid case to present in the first place.
This raises serious questions about how the NPA decides which cases to prosecute.
In my request to the Minister and Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee I will ask why the state pursued this matter before building a stronger case.
At the earliest available opportunity I will also be submitting parliamentary questions to get clarity on the following:
What was the total cost of the Dewani;
Who sanctioned the decision to continue the prosecution of Dewani; and
If there wasn't enough evidence to pursue this case, what were the reasons for it continuing.
The DA has long held that due course of the law must be central to our criminal justice system. This case raises many questions about the efficacy and effectiveness of our prosecuting authority.
It is important that our prosecuting authority is fit and proper to discharge due process in both high-profile cases and those they are faced with on a daily basis.
There are many unanswered questions about how the NPA conducts its business and Parliament must use this opportunity to fully address the systemic malfunctions at our prosecuting authority if we are to rescue our criminal justice system.
Statement issued by Glynnis Breytenbach MP, DA Shadow Minister of Justice, December 9 2014
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter
