Not giving Pistorius his passport was wrong: judge

Pretoria magistrate Desmond Nair "misdirected himself" with the bail conditions he set for Oscar Pistorius, the High Court in Pretoria found.

"Not giving the appellant his passport was wrong," said Judge Bert Bam, handing down judgement on Pistorius's appeal of some of his bail conditions.

The paralympian was arrested on February 14 after his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp was shot dead in his Pretoria home. Pistorius was not present for the appeal.

Bam said: "He has immovable assets. He is a professional athlete. He needs his passport to compete."

Pistorius was emotional, but there was no evidence he was of "unstable mind" and needed to report to a probation officer, the judge said.

He called this "unreasonable and unfair" and unsupported by any evidence.

"He will be allowed to use his passport to travel outside the country," said Judge Bam.

"I could find no reason why the appellant should be forbidden to leave the country to compete abroad," he said.

A condition was that he informed his attorney a week before travelling, and provided an itinerary.

He had to hand back his passport to his attorney within 24 hours of his return from travelling.

Other conditions the judge also set aside - Sapa

Murder-accused paralympian Oscar Pistorius will be allowed to travel again after the High Court in Pretoria set aside some of his bail conditions on Thursday.

"I could find no reason why the appellant should be forbidden to leave the country to compete abroad," said Judge Bam.

"He has immovable assets. He is a professional athlete. He needs his passport to compete," he said.

On hearing the news, his agent Peet van Zyl said it would be up to Pistorius to decide if he wanted to start training again.

"I have not discussed it (participating in races) with him yet, and would not be able to say if he would. He has not trained yet, and when a man hasn't trained for such a long time he cannot just start racing again.

"I will sit down with him and discuss it with him, but he will be the one to decide and let us know if wants to race," Van Zyl said.

Handing down the judgment that lifted the restrictions on Pistorius's movement, Bam said magistrate Desmond Nair, had "misdirected himself" with the stringent conditions set down in February.

The conditions Bam set aside were:

• that he surrender his passport to the magistrate's office (3b);
• that he refrain from applying for a passport or travel documents until the case against him is concluded (3c);

• that he refrain from entering the international departure hall of any airport or the departure hall of any international destination (3d);
• that he submit himself to the supervision of a probation officer or correctional officer (3h);

• that he not be charged with an offence relating to violence against women while on bail (3i);

• that he not consume alcohol or a banned substance (3j).

Bam said conditions 3 h, i and j "clearly do not serve any purpose" and show "the magistrate was wrong".

On 3h he said there was no evidence he was unstable and needed to report to a probation officer. The athlete had merely became emotional when the details of Steenkamp's death were read into the court record at his first appearance.

"Let's keep in mind that the charge is very serious," said Bam.

The conditions that Pistorius report to the Brooklyn police station twice a week, and that he not go to his home at the Silverwoods Country Estate, must also be disregarded because they were not in magistrate Desmond Nair's order, said Bam.

To travel, Pistorius had to inform his attorney a week before leaving, and provide an itinerary. He had to hand his passport back to his attorney within 24 hours of his return.

The National Prosecuting Authority, who had argued in February that he was a flight risk after accusing him of premeditated murder, believed Pistorius would abide by the revised conditions, and would focus on preparing for the next court appearance in June.

NPA spokesman Medupe Simasike said outside the court that the State's investigation was going well and believed it would be completed soon.

"Once it is completed that is when we will know about the trial date."

It was too early to say whether the State had a strong case.

"Once the investigations are complete and the case comes to court, that is when we will be able to say whether it is strong or not strong."

He would not comment neither on whether an indictment would be handed over at the next court appearance in June, nor on how many witnesses the State would call.