No time limit on charges for sexual offences

Victims of all sexual offences will no longer have to lay criminal charges within 20 years after the attack.

There will now be no limit on the time to institute criminal proceedings against perpetrators, as currently provisioned in the Criminal Procedure Act.

This follows a Constitutional Court ruling on Thursday to uphold a decision that section 18 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which did not allow all victims of sexual abuse to lay criminal charges 20 years after the incident occurred, was unconstitutional and invalid.

However, the declaration of invalidity has been suspended for 24 months to allow Parliament to change the law.

Section 18 of the Criminal Procedure Act stated that all sexual offences other than rape, compelled rape, human trafficking for sexual purposes and using a child or person who is mentally disabled for pornographic reasons, could not be criminally prosecuted after a period of 20 years had lapsed from the time the offence was committed.

The judgment comes after eight people, who accused billionaire stockbroker Sydney Frankel of sexually assaulting them between 1970 and 1989, approached the Constitutional Court for a confirmation order after the high court found that section 18 of the act was unconstitutional and invalid.

The Constitutional Court in its unanimous judgment ordered that section 18(f) should be read as though the words “and all other sexual offences whether in terms of common law or statute” appeared.

The court also ordered that should Parliament fail to enact remedial action within 24 months, the interim reading-in would become final.

The eight respondents, who were six to 15 years old when the alleged abuse took place, decided in 2015 to lay criminal charges against Frankel.

However, the director of public prosecutions in Gauteng declined to prosecute in terms of section 18, on the grounds that more than 20 years had lapsed.

PRIMARY RATIONALE

Frankel died in 2017 at the age of 68.

The Constitutional Court held that the primary rationale for the distinction contemplated in section 18, was based on the perception that certain sexual offences were more serious than others.

“It is clear … that there is no rational basis for the right to prosecute to lapse after 20 years in respect of other forms of sexual offences, and not for rape or compelled rape,” the court said in its judgment.

“Sexual offences may differ in form but the psychological harm they all produce may be similar,” it said.

The judges said section 18 also undermined the state’s effort to comply with its international obligations.