‘New’ judge to decide the fate of gem accused
FOUR years after being arrested during raids at their homes and businesses by the Hawks, 13 prominent names in the local diamond industry, who stand accused of being involved in an alleged illicit diamond dealing syndicate, will next month know if their trial will continue.
The 13 accused face charges of contravening the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (racketeering with the alternative of being part of a pattern of criminal gang activity and the acquisition, possession and use of proceeds from unlawful activities) and contravening the Diamond Act (dealing, purchasing and receiving unpolished diamonds), after they were arrested by the Hawks in August 2014, following a covert police operation called “Project Darling” that took place from February 2013 to February 2014.
Infiltrate
During the operation, an undercover agent, Linton Jephta was assigned to infiltrate identified individuals in Kimberley. His assignment was to purport that he was unlawfully selling unpolished diamonds, which in fact belonged to the State.
Numerous alleged transactions (amounting to nearly R30 million) led to the arrest of the accused.
During the accused’s next appearance in the Northern Cape High Court, Judge Johann Daffue, from the Free State High Court in Bloemfontein, will deliver judgment on the application for a permanent stay of prosecution, brought by the defence, and will decide the fate of the accused by either granting the application, which will mean the case comes to an end and the accused walk free, or dismiss the application and the trial will start de novo (anew).
The application for a permanent stay of prosecution by the accused’s legal representatives follows the recusal of the former presiding officer in the matter, Judge Bulelwa Pakati, who earlier this month recused herself “in the interest of justice”.
The defence brought the application for her recusal on the basis that Pakati did not disclose an e-mail (dated August 2016) where she indicated that an attempt was allegedly made on behalf of the accused to “unduly influence or bribe” her.
The application came on the same day that Jephta, considered to be “the most important witness in the case”, was scheduled to be called as a State witness.
On the same morning, before the commencement of proceedings, the State also produced four statements by Jephta, in which he claimed that there had also been attempts made for or on behalf of the accused to bribe him. Two of these statements dated back to August 2016.
These were handed to the defence by State prosecutor Johan Roothman in anticipation of a recusal application.
Yesterday, Roothman advanced arguments in support of the dismissal of the application for the permanent stay of prosecution.
Heads of arguments filed by the defence and the prosecution in respect of the application were handed in last week.
Roothman started off proceedings by submitting to Daffue that the merits of the trial was “best left for the trial court and could play no role in granting (or dismissing) the application. He called on Daffue to refrain from going into the merits of the case as this could even be considered “dangerous”.
“Just looking at the merits of the case can be compared to driving a vehicle while looking in the rearview mirror,” Roothman said.
Daffue, responding to Roothman in the dialogue style he had also displayed during the defence’s submissions in support of the application, said he had “several concerns” about the matter at hand.