Charge sheet

There are two perspectives on prosecution decisions: one based on reviewing all facts to decide on prosecution, and a second where a charge sheet is prepared and the decision to prosecute is made by the team.

“One is to say, we have investigated this case. These are all the facts. Please look at all the facts and decide whether this person should be prosecuted or not. That is one way of looking at it. The other way of looking at it is that you say, we have conducted an investigation. We have prepared a charge sheet. I am satisfied that there is a prima facie case. I have made a decision to prosecute.”

The DPP concurs with Advocate Johnson's decision to charge as set out in the chargesheet.

“And I concur with your decision to charge them on the offences set out in the charge sheet. Yes, so what the DPP is concurring with is your decision to charge them.”

Advocate Johnson refused to expand on matters in the charge sheet as they are sub judice and involved ongoing court proceedings.

“When I said I would expand more, it was in reference to the charge sheet that was attached and those parts that I referred to that I can't talk about. Those matters are in court and sub judice.”

The charge sheet submitted to court did not reference that the panel had been approved by Head Office; this approval was omitted.

“Nowhere in this charge sheet do you speak of that panel being approved. That somehow is omitted in this charge sheet. Oversight, perhaps or whatever, I just want to establish as a fact that it is not there. The approval is not referenced herein the charge sheet at all.”

Colonel Padayachee confirmed the approval by Head Office was not referenced in the charge sheet.

“The approval is not referenced here.”