State won’t allow convicted criminal to go to jail

The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has thrown a convicted criminal a lifeline, saying that imprisoning him all these years later would not be in the interests of justice.


In 2010, a Pretoria man convicted of culpable homicide reported to prison to start serving his sentence but was turned away because of an administrative bungle, which took them more than six years to sort out. Now, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has thrown him a lifeline, finding imprisoning him all these years later would not be in the interests of justice and sending his case back to a magistrate to consider correctional supervision. On the night of 30 June, 2006, Rapholo Edwin Manyaka – then just 20 years old – was involved in a horror head-on crash on…

Subscribe to continue reading this article
and support trusted South African journalism

Access PREMIUM news, competitions
and exclusive benefits

SUBSCRIBE
Already a member? SIGN IN HERE

In 2010, a Pretoria man convicted of culpable homicide reported to prison to start serving his sentence but was turned away because of an administrative bungle, which took them more than six years to sort out.

Now, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has thrown him a lifeline, finding imprisoning him all these years later would not be in the interests of justice and sending his case back to a magistrate to consider correctional supervision.

On the night of 30 June, 2006, Rapholo Edwin Manyaka – then just 20 years old – was involved in a horror head-on crash on Garsfontein Road in which two men were killed.

He was ultimately found guilty of two counts of culpable homicide and sentenced to four years in prison (one of which was suspended). When he went to hand himself over at Voortrekker Correctional Centre, though, he was informed by an official they were not in possession of his court records, sent home and told they would arrange to have him picked up once they had the paperwork.

ALSO READ: Gauteng records its highest increase in murder rates in five years

But it wasn’t until September 2016 – more than six years later – that a warrant for his arrest was issued, prompting Manyaka to turn to the courts with an application to reconsider his sentence. In the SCA’s majority ruling this week, Judge Zeenat Carelse highlighted Manyaka was not the cause “of the inordinate delay that followed since the collision”.

“Over the intervening 15 years, [Manyaka], who is now a 35 year old adult, has married. In September 2016, his wife was expecting their third child. He is currently gainfully employed. There is nothing to rebut the fact that over the 15 years [he] has led a socially responsible and crime-free life,” she said.

“I agree with the magistrate that direct imprisonment was the appropriate sentence at the time but due to the special circumstances of this case, correctional supervision will be most appropriate,” Zeenat said.

“The long delay in bringing finality to the matter and not knowing when the officials would come has hung like a sword over the [Manyaka’s] head. Imprisonment at this time would result only in retribution. In reaching this conclusion, I have not overlooked the fact that two young men have died as a result of the applicant’s conduct.”

bernadettew@citizen.co.za

Read more on these topics

Crime Supreme Court of Appeal

Access premium news and stories

Access to the top content, vouchers and other member only benefits