Africa-Press – South-Africa. AfriForum’s private prosecution unit has served papers to appeal the Potchefstroom Regional Court’s discharge of Defence Minister Thandi Modise in an animal cruelty case.
While still National Assembly speaker, Modise was privately prosecuted on behalf of the National Council of Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NSPCA).
Modise was charged with six counts of animal cruelty relating to dozens of animals that died or were emaciated on her farm in North West in 2014 while she was the province’s premier.
According to the charge sheet, more than 50 pigs and a number of other animals, including sheep, chickens and geese, were already dead when the NSPCA first inspected the farm. A further 224 animals had to be put down as they were severely emaciated.
Modise pleaded not guilty to the charges but did not provide a plea explanation.
Case dismissed
After AfriForum closed its case, Modise’s lawyer, advocate Dali Mpofu, SC, brought a Section 174 application, arguing that the matter should be discharged as there was no evidence before court which could link Modise to the charges.
Magistrate Ben Mtebele dismissed the case against Modise after finding that there was no prima facie evidence against her.
The court agreed with Mpofu’s argument that Modise could not be held responsible for what happened on the farm, finding that there was no vicarious liability.
The court also accepted that Modise had been in Cape Town at the time, although no evidence was led to that effect.
Mtebele went one step further by finding that Tebogo Mokaedi should have been held responsible for what happened on the farm.
Mokaedi was allegedly hired to work on the farm by employees of the North West government who worked in Modise’s office while she was premier. The court heard testimony that Modise had tasked the employees with looking for a caretaker for her private farm.
Mokaedi left the farm after not being paid for 10 weeks, nor being given any food to survive on the farm. This evidence was not contested and was accepted by the court.
PICS | Carcasses sprawled across Modise’s farm as the stench of rotting flesh clung to the air
Mokaedi testified that he told Nimrod Tlhoaele, known as Khoroba, that he was leaving the farm.
Khoroba, who was a driver for the North West legislature, hired Mokaedi. He told the court that Modise’s secretary had asked him to find someone to work on the farm.
Mokaedi had also phoned Khoroba when the animal feed ran out on one occasion, which was only replenished weeks later, the court heard.
Appeal
In its appeal papers, AfriForum’s private prosecution unit asserts that the court erred regarding a number of aspects in its judgment and that a number of questions of law needed to be answered.
These included whether:
AfriForum’s prosecution unit further argued that the court did not take all the evidence into account and ignored the fact that Modise did not give any version for the common cause facts that the animals were found on her farm in a severe state of emaciation.
“The version of the accused about her whereabouts and steps taken to care for her animals as well as people that she appointed as workers on her farm are peculiarly within her knowledge,” the private prosecution unit said.
“It is however undisputed that neither Tebogo nor Karabo were ever employed by the accused. The only reasonable irresistible inference remains that she has appointed no one to work on her farm and to care for her animals.
“The court not only acquitted the accused but was bold enough to identify the ‘farmworkers’ who had no means to provide feed to the animals as the culprits. The inference is apt that the court accepted the fact that the animals were neglected and found themselves without feed and water. The court relied on the reasonable absence of the accused that was never proven.”
AfriForum’s private prosecution unit was also of the view that court failed to identify and apply the correct test for the discharge application.
For More News And Analysis About South-Africa Follow Africa-Press
