Durban - Armed robbers who use knives may have better luck with the law if they commit their crimes north of Durban.
The Verulam Magistrate’s Court has taken a peculiar decision, which is not followed in either the Durban or Pinetown magistrates’ courts, to allow armed robbery cases where knives are used - and no harm is caused to the victims - to be heard in the district court rather than the regional court.
Robbery with aggravating circumstances cases, which involve the use of any dangerous weapon, fall under the jurisdiction of regional courts because they carry a minimum sentence of 15 years unless “compelling circumstances” justify a lesser sentence.
The district court can only sentence up to three years in jail.
The move has been criticised by the Institute of Security Studies senior researcher and a former prosecutor, Gareth Newham, but a legal academic said there was nothing untoward about it.
Sources said they believed it was aimed at clearing backlogs on the court’s rolls as suspected robbers in this category plead guilty, knowing they can get off lightly.
They also said cases with “toy guns” were also treated the same way - but the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) did not comment on this.
In the Durban and Pinetown courts, there is no distinction between armed robbery with firearms or knives. All cases are referred to the regional court.
The KwaZulu-Natal prosecutions head, advocate Moipone Noko, said there was no problem with the approach.
“The case proceeds as robbery with aggravating circumstances, but without invoking the minimum sentencing clause. If the matter is heard in the district court and the judicial officer is of the view that it merits sentence in the regional court, it is transferred accordingly.”
She said in the past, cases of this nature that were referred to the regional court were struck from the roll as the judicial officer believed the matters could be heard in the district court and transferred to the regional court for sentence.
If cases are struck off, the accused would have to be summoned to appear in court for the charges to be reinstated.
She said the administration of justice was not being compromised.
“This issue was raised by the NPA at a meeting with the chief magistrate, the regional court president and the regional and district magistrates. We have applied our guidelines and internal measures and our consultations with the judiciary to ensure that justice is served.”
Institute for Security Studies senior researcher Newham said the stance was “worrying” as armed robbery cases were on the increase, according to last year’s crime statistics.
“In the past two years, there have been 18 000 more armed robbery cases reported and in most of these cases, knives are used,” he said.
“So these criminals need to face the full might of the law or they will go back into the community and commit the same crimes.”
Newham said there did not appear to be a clear strategy in the criminal justice system to deal with the upsurge in the cases.
A former prosecutor was opposed to the approach.
“There is nothing ‘legally wrong’ with it, but I do not agree with it. It appears that the prosecutors want to take short cuts. There are just as many backlogs on the district court rolls.”
But UKZN law professor Managay Reddi said there was nothing wrong with the NPA’s approach.
“I do not believe that robbery cases should only be heard in the regional court. If a district magistrate were to convict an accused of robbery and is of the view that the circumstances of the offence may warrant the imposition of a minimum sentence of 15 years, the magistrate is permitted, in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act, to remit the matter to the regional court for sentencing,” said Reddi.
The Mercury