https://www.polity.org.za
Deepening Democracy through Access to Information
Home / Case Law / All Case Law RSS ← Back
Close

Email this article

separate emails by commas, maximum limit of 4 addresses

Sponsored by

Close

Embed Video

Helen Suzman Foundation v Minister of Police and Others (1054/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 4

Helen Suzman Foundation v Minister of Police and Others (1054/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 4

23rd January 2015

SAVE THIS ARTICLE      EMAIL THIS ARTICLE

Font size: -+

  • Helen Suzman Foundation v Minister of Police and Others (1054/2015) [2015] ZAGPPHC 4
    Download
    1.73 MB
Sponsored by

[1] The applicant (also, at times, referred to as "HSF") applies for certain declaratory relief flowing from the suspension by the first respondent ("the Minister"), on 23 December 2014, of the second respondent (without being disrespectful, but for the sake of brevity, I will refer to him as "Dramat") from his position as the National Head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation ("DPCI").

The applicant also applies for ancillary declaratory relief, inter alia, flowing from the appointment by the Minister of the third respondent as Acting National Head of the DPCI following the Minister's suspension of Dramat.

Advertisement

[2] Before me, Mr Unterhalter SC, assisted by Mr Du Plessis, appeared for the applicant and Mr Mokhari SC, assisted by Ms Seboko, appeared for the first respondent.

[3] Dramat, although duly cited by the applicant, did not take an active part in the proceedings although he did, through his attorney, file a written notice to abide on 13 January 2015.

Advertisement

Attached to the founding papers, there is also a letter from Dramat's attorney, dated 12 December 2014, written to the Minister in response to the latter's notice of "contemplated provisional suspension" to Dramat dated 9 December 2014. In this letter to the Minister, Dramat's attorney also challenges the lawfulness of the intended suspension of his client.

[4] The third and fourth respondents did not take part in the proceedings.

[5] The matter was enrolled before me as an urgent application on Thursday 15 January 2015. On that occasion the question of urgency was challenged on behalf of the Minister, not because the latter felt that the case was not urgent, but because of the technical objection that the case was enrolled for a Thursday instead of a Tuesday, in terms of the existing Practice Directive, and insufficient time was given to the Minister to file his opposing affidavit and heads of argument.

During an adjournment, the question of urgency was resolved, and the Minister was afforded an opportunity to file his opposing papers and heads of argument which were given to me over the week-end of 17 and 18 January. The case was postponed until 19 January, when the merits of the case were argued before me.

EMAIL THIS ARTICLE      SAVE THIS ARTICLE

To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here

Comment Guidelines

About

Polity.org.za is a product of Creamer Media.
www.creamermedia.co.za

Other Creamer Media Products include:
Engineering News
Mining Weekly
Research Channel Africa

Read more

Subscriptions

We offer a variety of subscriptions to our Magazine, Website, PDF Reports and our photo library.

Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.

View store

Advertise

Advertising on Polity.org.za is an effective way to build and consolidate a company's profile among clients and prospective clients. Email advertising@creamermedia.co.za

View options
Free daily email newsletter Register Now