Enough is enough, the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, said regarding the long delay in the fraud and corruption case against former crime intelligence boss Richard Mdluli and his two co-accused, which has dragged its heels for years.
Judge Papi Mosopa has now ordered that the prosecuting authority must immediately obtain a date for the trial to proceed.
Mdluli, who is fighting the refusal by the police to pay his legal fees, must also approach the Office of the Deputy Judge President for a date when his review application against the SAPS’ refusal to pay his fees can be heard.
Judge Mosopa made it clear that the criminal trial would proceed, even if Mdluli’s review application had not yet been determined.
The judge said that the review application had nothing to do with the merits of the case, thus the trial could proceed.
He also said the fact that the trial had been dragging its heels was not only prejudicial to all the accused, but also to some of the witnesses, who have been in witness protection since 2011.
Judge Mosopa also pointed out that all the accused were now elderly and would be called upon to remember the facts of a case which dated back more than a decade.
His judgment followed an application by the State in terms of section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act for unreasonable delay in the trial.
The State blamed Mdluli for the delays, but Judge Mosopa said it was Mdluli’s right to pursue his review application, even if he wanted to take it all the way to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
Mdluli and his two co-accused, former SAPS supply chain manager Heine Barnard and chief financial officer Solomon Lazarus, are facing charges of corruption, fraud and theft.
The charges stem from the time that they were employed by the state – between 2008 and 2012 – and were at the helm of the police crime intelligence services.
All three accused face charges related to the alleged abuse of the police’s secret slush fund.
The allegations include the payment of private trips to China and Singapore, the private use of witness protection houses and the leasing of Mdluli’s private residence to the state in order to pay his bond.
Among others, it is claimed in the indictment that during one of Mdluli’s trips to Singapore, in 2009, he allegedly used some of the funds for personal expenses.
It is claimed that he bought electronic equipment, clothing, jewellery and perfume, using state funds.
A further allegation is that a month prior to the Singapore trip, Mdluli booked a holiday for himself and his wife to China, flying business class at taxpayers’ expense.
Mdluli and Barnard were arrested in 2011, and a month later, Mdluli successfully applied for charges to be withdrawn against him.
This decision was taken on review and in April 2014, the Supreme Court of Appeal confirmed the setting aside of the decision to withdraw charges against Mdluli.
This resulted in the matter being reinstated and served before the Specialised Commercial Crime Court, Pretoria, in April 2015.
The matter was struck off the roll in July 2015 and the court ordered that the matter can only be enrolled if certain documents to be disclosed to the defence are declassified.
This was only done in July 2019.
The matter was then enrolled in August 2020, however, it has been on hold in light of Mdluli’s continued battle to secure police funding for his defence.
Cape Times