Joshlin Smith case: A landmark trial in South Africa's fight against human trafficking
In powerful closing arguments on Tuesday, Senior State Advocate Zelda Swanepoel described the Joshlin Smith case as unlike any South Africa has seen before, a heartbreaking story where the victim's voice has not been heard.
The six-year-old girl went missing from her Middelpos home in Saldanha Bay on February 19, 2024.
Her mother, Racquel 'Kelly' Smith, her boyfriend, Jacquen 'Boeta' Appollis, and their friend, Steveno 'Steffie' van Rhyn, were charged with kidnapping and human trafficking.
They have pleaded not guilty.
Former accused Lourentia 'Renz' Lombaard testified that Kelly sold her daughter to a sangoma for R20 000.
Addressing the Western Cape High Court, Swanepoel explained that in most human trafficking cases, the child is recovered and can testify about what happened. But Joshlin remains missing. Her absence, Swanepoel said, makes this case unprecedented.
'Usually, in a TIP (Trafficking in Persons) case, the most important source of information is the victim,' she told the court. 'In this case, we don't have that.'
Drawing on extensive research and a recent article that she submitted as an authority, Swanepoel said that although South Africa has dealt with child trafficking before, those cases were very different.
In the past, in three matters, undercover police operations intervened before any actual harm occurred. The children were never fully handed over to criminals.
But Joshlin's situation is different.
'This is the first time we are dealing with a case where the child is truly gone,' Swanepoel emphasised. 'That is why this case is so important, not only for justice for Joshlin but also for the development of our law.'
According to the State, the evidence shows that Joshlin was sold in a planned agreement between the accused parties.
Swanepoel described this as 'modern-day slavery', the commodification of a human being for exploitation.
'A person is never supposed to be a commodity,' she argued. 'It sounds bizarre to the reasonable person that a child could be sold. But sadly, that is the reality we are facing.'
Because South African law historically had no crime specifically criminalising the selling of a person, Swanepoel explained that legislation was introduced to close this gap, following international obligations like the Palermo Protocol.
Swanepoel broke down the elements of trafficking as set out in South African law under Section 4(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons Act (PACOTIP). She explained that trafficking requires three elements:
The act - what was done,
The means - how it was done, and
The purpose - exploitation.
However, when the victim is a child, as in Joshlin's case, only two elements are required: the act and the purpose. The 'means' such as force or coercion is not necessary to prove, because children are inherently vulnerable.
'Section 11 of our legislation removes the need to prove the means when a child is trafficked,' Swanepoel said, referring the court to previous cases she had prosecuted where this principle was upheld.
Swanepoel urged the court to recognise the gravity of the allegations.
'This is a very important case, not only because of Joshlin, but because it shapes how South Africa protects its most vulnerable.'
The trial continues.
mandilakhe.tshwete@inl.co.za
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
an hour ago
- The South African
Newspaper headlines from around the world - Monday, 9 June 2025
A bundle of newspapers on the table. Image: The South African/CANVA Here are the stories that made headlines on the front pages of newspapers worldwide on Monday, 9 June 2025. The New York Times front page reported that Russia's spies have a name for China: 'the enemy'. The Wall Street Journal front page reported that police and LA protesters clashed after Trump mobilised the National Guard. The Hindustan Times' front page reported that Manipur was rocked by more violence and that a curfew had been imposed. China Daily's front page reported that trade in services among nations is accelerating. Daily Mail's front page reported on a visa scam that makes a mockery of the Prime Minister's pledge on migration. The Guardian front page reported that Trump had deployed the National Guard on the streets of Los Angeles in a dramatic escalation. If you wish to stay up-to-date – for FREE – on the latest international and South African news, then bookmark The South African website for all that plus the latest in the world of finance, sport, lifestyle – and more. Did we mention it was 100% free to read …?
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
NPA's Leadership Crisis: Eroding Legal Integrity in Favour of Political Expediency
Calls intensify for National Director of Public Prosecutions Shamila Batohi's removal as the NPA faces accusations of incompetence and strategic missteps in the wake of a deepening crisis in the criminal justice system. Image: Henk Kruger/ Independent Newspapers Clyde N.S. Ramalaine On 3 June 2025, the Free State High Court in Bloemfontein ruled that the extradition of Moroadi Cholota from the United States to South Africa was unlawful. This landmark judgment has not only released the state's key figure in the high-profile R255 million asbestos corruption case but also cleared the way for the prosecution of others involved. Still, it has also exposed deep procedural and constitutional failings within South Africa's prosecutorial regime. Her unlawful extradition from the United States and subsequent release by the Free State High Court reveal more than just procedural oversight, they expose systemic dysfunction, a repurposing of primary objectives of the NPA as articulated in its strategic ethos within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and unravels the credibility of South Africa's anti-corruption drive. The Ruling A Blow to Prosecutorial Credibility Presiding over the matter, Judge Phillip Loubser was unequivocal: "The prosecution has not found reasonable doubt, or at all, that there was a valid or lawful request from South Africa for the extradition of Ms Cholota from the United States. It follows that if there was no valid extradition request, then the extradition itself was without any basis and, therefore, unlawful." The National Prosecuting Authority's (NPA) failure to adhere to the legally mandated process in the extradition request of Moroadi Cholota reveals not merely a procedural blunder, but an institutional failing. By initiating the extradition request instead of the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services, as explicitly required by law, the NPA not only invalidated its case but compromised the integrity of South Africa's justice system on the international stage. The NPA will contend that this is not the first time it has led to extradition cases and that this is the first instance in which a case has been registered in this regard. It will furthermore argue that it is appealing the Schultz case, which constitutes a legal precedent. Notwithstanding this counter, the NPA cannot deny that this deviation from legal protocol suggests either gross incompetence or a willful disregard for constitutional processes, raising serious ethical questions about accountability within the NPA. Moreover, by allegedly providing misleading or incomplete information to U.S. authorities, the South African state stands accused of deception — a charge that, if substantiated, undermines its moral authority and diplomatic credibility, and reveals a prosecutorial body more concerned with performance politics than with the pursuit of justice. The unlawful handling of Cholota's extradition reflects a disturbing pattern in which the state weaponises legal instruments while bypassing constitutional safeguards. This erosion of legal integrity in favour of political expediency suggests the NPA, whether by design or acquiescence, has become a tool in internal power struggles rather than a guardian of justice. In failing to uphold the rule of law and misleading an international partner in the process, the NPA exposes a justice system teetering between institutional collapse and captured governance. The court's ruling on the lack of jurisdiction underscores a foundational pillar of constitutional and international law, that the legitimacy of a trial is inseparable from the legality of the accused's presence before the court. In Moroadi Cholota's case, the unlawful initiation of the extradition process rendered her transfer to South Africa constitutionally defective, thereby stripping the court of jurisdiction to try her. Any attempt to prosecute her under such conditions would not only violate Section 35 of the Constitution, which guarantees fair trial rights and due process but also contravene international legal norms governing extradition and state sovereignty. This ruling affirms that procedural integrity is not merely a technicality, but a substantive requirement of justice; the state cannot bypass lawful channels to secure an accused and still claim the authority to prosecute. To do so would be to legitimise executive overreach, dismantle legal safeguards, and invite the erosion of the rule of law under the guise of criminal justice. Moroadi Cholota giving evidence at the Commission of Inquiry into State Capture. Last week the Bloemfontein High Court ruled that her extradition from the United States was unlawful. Image: Independent Newspapers archive Systemic Indictment of the NPA The judgment handed down by the Free State High Court should not be read in isolation; it must be understood as a judicial demand for accountability, procedural discipline, and institutional humility. The NPA's failed prosecution of Ms Moroadi Cholota is, regrettably, not an isolated mishap. In a 2023 article co-authored with Paul M. Ngobeni (available at: " we called for the NPA leadership to be held accountable as we critically examined eight high-profile cases pursued by the NPA under the rubric of its 'state capture' prosecutions. Our analysis revealed a pattern of endemic institutional failures, particularly under the leadership of the current National Director of Public Prosecutions, Advocate Shamila Batohi. Among the most pressing concerns were the following: Politicisation of Prosecutions The NPA's alignment with factional battles in the ANC undermines its credibility. Its selective use of the Zondo Commission's findings, non-binding and inadmissible in court, has raised alarms about the weaponisation of commissions of inquiry to serve political ends. Strategic Misuse of Evidence The collapse of cases like the Estina Dairy Farm prosecution revealed the dangers of substituting public rhetoric for admissible evidence. The NPA has repeatedly stumbled in converting politically sensational findings into courtroom success. Selective Disclosure and Narrative Framing The NPA has routinely withheld countervailing evidence, especially in asset forfeiture cases such as Optimum Coal, to curate a prosecutorial narrative while undermining procedural fairness. Civil society organisations such as Freedom Under Law and Corruption Watch have raised repeated concerns about this trend. Institutional Inefficiencies Structural deficiencies, ranging from poor leadership and resource mismanagement to political interference, continue to plague the NPA's capacity to lead credible prosecutions. These points not only relate to individual accountability but also to the need for institutional redesign. The location of the NPA under executive control remains a structural vulnerability. Lack of Accountability and Transparency The NPA has consistently deflected public criticism, painting itself as the victim of attacks rather than accepting legitimate concerns about its performance. This erodes public confidence and corrodes prosecutorial independence. Calls for an independent oversight body to scrutinise prosecutorial decisions have gained renewed urgency. NPA's Compulsive Overreliance on Appeals – Default Mechanism As expected, the NPA informed South Africa that it intends to appeal the court's findings. While the doctrine of appeal is a constitutional provision, it is important to appreciate the context and primary intentions of the state in pursuing such an appeal. A fundamental yet under-examined pathology within the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) is its compulsive reliance on appeals, not as a last resort for justice, but as a default mechanism to shield prosecutorial ineptitude. At the heart of this phenomenon lies a psychology unmoored from accountability: senior prosecutors and executive leadership pursue prolonged legal contests not at their own personal or professional expense, but through the seemingly bottomless reservoir of the public fiscus. This distance between institutional action and individual consequence fosters a culture of indifference towards both fiscal prudence and judicial efficacy. The decision to appeal, often against the weight of legal reasoning and precedent, is thus less a matter of legal necessity than a strategic deflection—an effort to postpone institutional reckoning, preserve internal reputations, and obscure prosecutorial failures. There appears to be little regard for the economic burden imposed on the state, the rights of the accused whose lives are held in indefinite legal limbo, or the broader erosion of public trust in the justice system. In the Cholota case, this is strikingly evident: despite the court's scathing findings, the NPA has signalled its intention to appeal, oblivious to the potential litigation costs should the state be sued for unlawful detention or rights infringements. This illustrates a prosecutorial psychology that prioritises institutional face-saving over constitutional integrity, emboldened by the knowledge that the price of legal misadventure will not be borne by those who authorise it. In the final analysis, the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Advocate Shamila Batohi, can no longer be exempt from the dismal performance of the NPA. She, together with her senior executive team, must be held accountable for the institution's persistent failures, including the frivolous pursuit of appeals and plausible wasteful expenditure incurred in cases that consistently collapse in court.
The South African
2 hours ago
- The South African
Missing Comrades runner has been found
There was a major scare at the Comrades marathon on Sunday when race organisers declared runner Moira Harding to be missing. 'She is confirmed to have finished Comrades at 16:52, but has not been seen since,' the initial post read. 'Any information would be greatly appreciated.' On Monday morning it was then confirmed that Harding had been found and is alive, but there is still concern for her wellbeing. Garrith Jamieson, the director of ALS Paramedics, told The Witness publication that she was found in a critical condition and was being airlifted to hospital. 'A wide-scale search was launched and paramedics with SAPS and Metro Police Search and Rescue and Netcare 911 managed to locate the runner who was in a critical state of health on Point Road. 'Advanced Life Support Paramedics are currently treating the patient on scene before being transported to a nearby hospital for the urgent care she requires,' he said. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 0211. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
