Cape Town - The attempt by Equatorial Guinea’s vice-president and son of president Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo to rescind an appeal order brought by Daniel Welman Janse van Rensburg has been upheld by the Western Cape High Court.
The kidnap victim filed for damages in the Western Cape High Court, which were granted. After the initial judgment, Teodorin Nguema Obiang tried to have the grim details of what Van Rensburg went through redacted from the record by instituting court action.
A full bench however upheld the initial order with Judges Derek Wille and André le Grange ruling in the majority, while Judge Daniel Thulare disagreed.
Obiang brought a rescission application against a judgment of the same court which would allow certain details of how Van Rensburg was tortured, assaulted and captured for more than a year in the African country be removed from the public’s view.
In June 2021, as the world was still dealing with the Covid-19 pandemic, an order was made as part of a civil judgment which would see Obiang forking out just less than R39 million to Van Rensburg.
Obiang would also have to pay interest to Van Rensburg. However, he tried to avoid paying the costs by using the surety of two fixed properties in Clifton and Constantia in Cape Town as a means to avoid paying Van Rensburg.
The problem started when the notice was served but Van Rensburg continued to challenge the vice-president.
Obiang was made aware that due to fluctuating property prices in Cape Town, he would be liable for R70 million in damages at the next court date.
According to a personal interaction between Van Rensburg’s representative and an unidentified individual at Equatorial Guinea’s embassy in Pretoria – who claimed to be Obiang’s personal assistant – the necessary amendments would have been made without any issues.
Obiang then tried every legal avenue to appeal the judgment for damages but was unsuccessful because his lawyers had already withdrawn from the record and made it known in every way possible that he had no lawyers in South Africa during that time.
In a judgment handed down on Friday, Judge Le Grange said pointing fingers at a weak administrative function of the government does not suffice as a reason to avoid responsibility, no matter one’s wealth.
“The rescission court of the first instance found that the appellant had disputed that he received the notices of withdrawal of attorneys of record.
“It matters not, as it was he who terminated his attorney’s mandate; therefore, he was at all times aware that they had ceased acting for him.
“There was no reason for the first respondent (Van Rensburg) to doubt that the delivery of further process on the embassy officials would not come to the appellant's (Obiang) attention. Thus, there was no reason to seek any further assistance from the court,” the judgment stated.