A taxi owner accused of intimidating shop owners in Mossel Bay into handing over “protection fees” and keeping records of payments in a notebook will remain behind bars after the high court dismissed his bid to be released on bail.
The 33-year-old man, who cannot by law be named until he has pleaded to extortion charges in court, was arrested in the Garden Route town with a co-accused for allegedly intimidating and threatening 25 shop owners in the Asla and KwaNonqaba areas in June 2024. They were each instructed to pay R500.
Police arrested the pair and the Mossel Bay magistrate’s court refused the taxi owner bail in December.
However, he appealed the decision in the Cape Town high court, arguing that the magistrate erred in finding it was not in the interests of justice to release him on bail as it was likely he would evade trial and intimidate witnesses.
He said the magistrate overlooked that he “resided permanently” outside the court’s jurisdiction and that suitable bail conditions could have been imposed. But a notebook listing the shops that were allegedly extorted, which police seized as evidence, could slam the brakes on the taxi owner’s alleged crime spree.
The prosecution opposed the application and relied on an affidavit from Capt Carel Cornelius, a police officer with nearly 40 years’ experience.
On a conspectus of the evidence, the [magistrate’s court] was correct to find that it was not in the interests of justice to permit the [alleged extortionist’s] release on bail. Accordingly therefore I find that the magistrate’s decision in refusing bail was correct
— Judge Mas-udah Pangarker
“He testified that incidents of extortion were reported to have occurred among mainly Ethiopian shop owners in KwaNonqaba and Da Gamaskop police precinct,” the judgment handed down by the high court on Tuesday reads.
“Due to their immense fear for their safety and that of their property, many of the foreign shop owners were unwilling to come forward and report these cases to the police. Consequently, various meetings were held between senior police officials and the shop owners and eventually two complainants came forward.”
Cornelius testified that police had applied for authorisation to conduct covert surveillance to dismantle the extortion syndicate operating in the area.
“Pursuant to information received from the complainants that the shops were visited every middle of the month, search and seizure warrants in respect of the taxis were applied for,” the judgment reads.
“Thereafter Cornelius and his colleagues commenced surveillance at a guest house which was identified as a place where a taxi, which stopped at the various spaza shops in the area, visited regularly. The taxi’s registration details corresponded with information the police had obtained.”
The surveillance team decided to intercept the occupants of the taxi, but when police tried to on June 14 2024, a chase ensued as the taxi sped away. The occupants were later apprehended, including the alleged extortionist, while others fled. One of the occupants turned state witness.
“This witness also linked the [alleged extortionist] to multiple instances of collecting protection money in his presence,” the judgment reads.
“The search and seizure warrant for the taxi yielded a notebook containing the names of 41 spaza shops and their owners, and it was noted that blue ‘ticks’ appeared next to 25 of these names, which corresponded with R500 (per shop) paid by 25 shop owners, totalling R12,500.”
Police seized R12,180 in cash along with the notebook.
“Furthermore it was confirmed that a VW Polo found at the guest house was rented by the [alleged extortionist] and had travelled from Cape Town to Mossel Bay,” the judgment reads.
“Cornelius emphasised that the police investigation illustrated that the [alleged extortionist], his co-accused and other individuals were engaged in extortion activity as part of a criminal enterprise. It was evident that a pattern emerged from the collection dates of the extortion money in that it differed from area to area, which underscored the organised manner in which the offences were committed.”
Cornelius testified that the alleged extortionist was identified in photographs as the person who collected cash from the spaza shops.
He also told the court that the man had misled police about his Cape Town address.
“Having regard to these factors, Cornelius regarded the [alleged extortionist] as a flight risk due to inconsistencies with his address(es),” the judgment reads. “Thus the likelihood existed that should he abscond from attending court, it would be difficult for the police to monitor him should bail be granted and tracing him would be problematic. It was also unclear to the police where in the Eastern Cape the [alleged extortionist’s] family resided.”
Cornelius expressed concern that if bail were granted, the alleged extortionist might reconnect with the other suspects from the taxi, as he possessed all the information relating to the matter. Cornelius also warned that the man was likely to commit further offences if released on bail.
In an affidavit, the alleged extortionist said he had a one-year-old son from a previous relationship and paid R3,000 a month for child maintenance. He said he owned several taxis, “some of which were still under vehicle finance, while others were bought in cash. He was a registered taxpayer.”
But judge Mas-udah Pangarker was not persuaded and dismissed the application on Tuesday.
“On a conspectus of the evidence, the [magistrate’s court] was correct to find that it was not in the interests of justice to permit the [alleged extortionist’s] release on bail. Accordingly therefore I find that the magistrate’s decision in refusing bail was correct,” Pangarker ruled.
“The appeal against the refusal of bail is dismissed.”
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.