Judge fails to stop his theft prosecution

High Court Judge Mpina Abednego Mathebul has failed to stop the continuation of his theft and money laundering case related to the alleged misappropriation of Road Accident Fund (RAF) monies when he was an attorney. A TimesLIVE report notes the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) on Friday dismissed Mathebula’s appeal against a Free State High Court order, which had dismissed his application for a permanent stay of prosecution. The criminal charges Mathebula face arose from his time while running a law firm in Sasolburg more than 10 years ago. Mathebula is charged together with Tswantso Phillemon Melato, who took over Mathebula’s law firm when the latter was appointed as a judge in 2017. Melato has since been struck off the roll of attorneys. The state alleges Mathebula committed the crimes between July 2012 and May 2018. In 2010, an elderly woman instructed Mathebula’s law firm to institute action against the RAF on behalf of her minor grandson, who had sustained bodily injuries in a motor vehicle accident. After the institution of the claim in the High Court, the court awarded the child R2.2m plus costs, to be paid by the RAF. Mathebula appeared in the Kroonstad Specialised Commercial Crimes Court in March 2023 to face charges of theft, alternatively fraud, money laundering and contempt of court. The state alleged Mathebula failed to deposit and keep the R2.2m in a trust investment account and also failed to establish a trust as ordered by the High Court. The state further alleged Mathebula made various unlawful transfers from the law firm’s trust account into his business account.

TimesLIVE reports that the SCA said in the present case, Mathebula did not raise trial-related prejudice such as an unreasonable delay in the commencement and finalisation of his criminal trial. The SCA said his complaint was two-fold: first, that the charges lacked a proper legal foundation; and second, that he was suffering undue social prejudice and financial loss because of the prosecution. ‘None of these constitutes trial-related prejudice.’ On the first complaint, the SCA said this concerned the merits of the state’s case, which only the trial court could determine. ‘As to social prejudice and financial loss, these are inherent inconveniences suffered by every accused and are not regarded as trial-related prejudice.’ 

Judgment

Full TimesLIVE report