Prosecutor Justice Bakamela had previously argued that the state needed time “to finalise financial investigation and continue extradition proceedings from the United Arab Emirates. Furthermore‚ the state needs a period of two to six months to finalise investigations.”
Magistrate Collin Nekosi found that the NPA had succeeded in providing sufficient reasons for why its requested postponement of the case was necessary. But he also criticised the state for a “lacuna in decision-making” that “has resulted in unreasonable delays in the completion of the proceedings‚ which if left unchecked could substantially prejudice the accused”.
“I’m left with the impression that there has been no momentum to the investigation as one would expect in a matter of this nature. This contributes to the delay by the state being even more reprehensible‚” he said.
Nekosi found‚ however‚ that the delay was not such that it warranted the “severest sanction” of the case being struck from the roll.
He also conceded that the damning High Court rulings made against the Asset Forfeiture Unit in its bid to freeze Gupta assets allegedly linked to the Estina scam may have fuelled the accused's belief “that there was no case to answer”.
The state insists it can prove that R250m intended for poor black farmers was siphoned into the bank accounts of Gupta families‚ but have failed twice to secure the freezing of Gupta assets it claims are linked to this criminal scheme.