The Constitutional Court heard a case yesterday which could have far-reaching consequences for the way cases are prosecuted, says a report in The Mercury. The issue was whether bodies like the National Council of SPCAs should be allowed to privately prosecute those the NPA let off the hook. The report says the matter is significant as Corruption Watch – which was admitted as a friend of the court – said a change in the legislation could allow for more corruption cases to come before court.

In its submission, Corruption Watch said that allowing ‘juristic persons’ to bring private prosecutions would be a ‘critical issue’ in combating corruption and would serve the public interest. ‘It also substantially reduces the incentive of those accused of corruption to seek to influence the NPA in an improper manner as they will be aware that this will not preclude a prosecution from taking place.’

Arguing for the NSPCA yesterday, Advocate Kevin Hopkins said the matter concerned the constitutionality of section 7(1) a of the Criminal Procedure Act, which made provision for private prosecution. ‘The purpose behind private prosecutions is to ensure that people that commit crimes don’t go unpunished simply because the NPA decided not to prosecute.’

However, the NPA’s Advocate Lesego Montsho-Moloisane said the differentiation as to who could undertake private prosecutions served a legitimate governmental purpose and the section must not be altered. She said the juristic person must be excluded from undertaking private prosecutions as there were already measures in place for them which people had successfully used in the past. The report adds judgment was reserved.

Full report in The Mercury (subscription needed)