THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

MEDIA SUMMARY – JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL

From:
The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal

Date:

20 March 2008

Status: Immediate

Please note that the media summary is intended for the benefit of the media and does not form part of the
judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal.

THEMBALETHU SAM v THE STATE

[1] The Supreme Court of Appeal today dismissed the appeal by Mr Thembalethu Sam who was
sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment for being in possession of a semi-automatic pistol.   The evidence led
at the trial was that he had used the firearm during the robbery of a bank in Adelaide, Eastern Cape.

[2] In the appeal before the SCA Sam argued that there was no offence for ‘possession of a semi-
automatic firearm’ and that, the provisions of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, commonly referred to as ‘the
minimum sentence provisions’ were not applicable.  Sam argued further that the regional court was
consequently wrong to have sentenced him to 15 years’ imprisonment instead of no more than 3 years’
imprisonment as provided for in the now repealed Arms and Ammunition Act 75 of 1969.  The firearm
concerned has also featured on a charge of attempted murder, arising out of the shooting of a bystander as
Sam tried to make good his escape after the robbery.

[3] The Supreme Court of Appeal rejected that argument, and held that in providing for increased penal
jurisdiction for the possession of a semi-automatic firearm the Legislature had not created a new offence.  It
merely enhanced the penal jurisdiction of the court in respect of an existing offence, which was considered to
fall in a certain category specified in the Schedule.  Offences relating to the possession of a semi-automatic
or automatic firearm were offences in respect of which the court acquired an enhanced penal jurisdiction.

[4] Having found no substantial and compelling circumstances justifying a departure from the minimum
sentence laid down in the Criminal Law Amendment Act to be present, the Supreme Court of Appeal
concluded that the regional magistrate had not misdirected himself and upheld the sentence of 15 years’
imprisonment of which 11 years were to run concurrently with the sentence of 15 years on the count of
robbery.

THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

MEDIA SUMMARY – JUDGMENT DELIVERED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEAL

From:
The Registrar, Supreme Court of Appeal

Date:

18 March 2008

Status: Immediate

Please note that the media summary is intended for the benefit of the media and does not form
part of the judgment of the Supreme Court of Appeal.

JG SWANEPOEL v THE STATE (508/07) [2008] ZASCA 8 (18 March 2008).

[1] The SCA today allowed an appeal brought by a Pretoria businessman, Mr Jaco
Gunter Swanepoel, against his conviction in the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court on charges of
assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm (modified on appeal to the Pretoria High Court
to common assault), crimen injuria and statutory contempt of court.

[2] The SCA held that the evidence of the complainant, who was the only witness called
by the State, was unsatisfactory in certain respects and the magistrate had misdirected himself
in several points. In consequence the SCA was obliged to reassess the evidence itself on the
record. It held that it was not possible to say where the truth lay and the appeal had to be
allowed on the first two counts.

[3] On the charge of statutory contempt of court the court said that at best for the State
the appellant was negligent and that counsel for the State had conceded that this was not
enough to sustain the conviction.