News / Africa
Malema fraud and corruption case struck off the roll
04 Aug 2015 at 13:39hrs | Views
South African court throws out Malema fraud case A South African judge struck the corruption case against fiery opposition politician Julius Malema off the roll on Tuesday, saying that the firebrand leader had waited too long for the trial.
Economic Freedom Fighters' leader Julius Malema walked out of court today after his trial - on fraud charges following the awarding of tenders to a company linked to him by the Limpopo transport department - was struck off the roll.
Judge George Mothle stressed that the court had four ways to proceed before it.
The State requested a postponement to August 24 to allow accused number 5, Kagisho Dichabe, to recover from illness.
Alternatively, the State wanted to proceed with the trial despite Dichabe's absence.
Judge George Mothle ruled that neither of those were options were possible. The trial had already been delayed since 2012, while also continuing trial with one of the accused absent would be inconsistent with the law.
The court could have granted that the trials be separated, but the State had not applied to separate the trials, and therefore could not rule on that.
It's only option therefore, Mothle ruled, was to strike the matter off the roll.
The State can lay charges again at a later date.
Economic Freedom Fighters' leader Julius Malema walked out of court today after his trial - on fraud charges following the awarding of tenders to a company linked to him by the Limpopo transport department - was struck off the roll.
Judge George Mothle stressed that the court had four ways to proceed before it.
The State requested a postponement to August 24 to allow accused number 5, Kagisho Dichabe, to recover from illness.
Alternatively, the State wanted to proceed with the trial despite Dichabe's absence.
Judge George Mothle ruled that neither of those were options were possible. The trial had already been delayed since 2012, while also continuing trial with one of the accused absent would be inconsistent with the law.
The court could have granted that the trials be separated, but the State had not applied to separate the trials, and therefore could not rule on that.
It's only option therefore, Mothle ruled, was to strike the matter off the roll.
The State can lay charges again at a later date.
Source - news24