NPA ‘taken aback' over Moroadi Cholota extradition ruling, hints at appeal
Judge Phillip Loubser ruled that Ace Magashule's former personal assistant was 'free to leave'.
Moroadi Cholota ( former PA to former Free State premier Ace Magashule) appears at Bloemfontein High Court on 5 May 2025. Picture: Gallo Images/Mlungisi Louw
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) says it will return to the drawing board after Moroadi Cholota's extradition from the United States (US) was declared unlawful.
On Tuesday, the Free State High Court in Bloemfontein ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to try Cholota on corruption charges, stating that the administrative processes behind her extradition had not been followed in accordance with the law.
Judge Phillip Loubser ruled that she was 'free to leave'.
Cholota was one of 18 co-accused in the R255 million asbestos corruption case involving former Free State premier Ace Magashule.
The main trial is scheduled to resume on Wednesday.
NPA reacts to judgment on Moroadi Cholota's extradition
NPA national spokesperson Mthunzi Mhaga expressed the authority's surprise at the court's decision, emphasising the state was of the view that Cholota's special plea was a disguised appeal.
'We really are taken aback by the judgment itself because you'll recall the view that we held that it was more of an appeal in South Africa on a foreign state judgment in circumstances where they had not utilised or explored the appeal processes in the United States,' he told the media.
Mhaga confirmed that the prosecution team would review the court's ruling and consider further legal steps.
'At the moment, we'll have to regroup as a team and reflect on the judgment and see if we can identify grounds upon which the judgment could be appealed, given its impact.'
ALSO READ: Free State asbestos trial: State accused of ruining life of Magashule's ex-PA Moroadi Cholota
He maintained that the state remained confident in the integrity of its prosecution efforts.
'The feeling from the team was that the conduct was above board in the allegations that were made against the investigating officers.
'Unfortunately, the judge found otherwise and, therefore, it is one of the issues that we have to reflect on,' Mhaga said.
Asbestos Judgment (trial within a trial) Free State High Court https://t.co/8gk1V0bsAs
June 3, 2025
'If we find a basis which allowed so that the judgment could be appealed, that determination will be informed by that process.
'What is important for now is to reflect on it, process it because it is a judgment that has the effect of a final order because we cannot charge her now unless the decision is overturned by a higher court in the event that we take a decision to appeal it,' he explained.
NPA challenges SCA ruling
Mhaga also addressed the court's finding that the state had made 'misrepresentations' to US authorities.
'If you're saying we must take accountability for the findings made by the judge in circumstances where I make it clear that we will still reflect on the judgment and see if there are grounds to appeal it, it's not fair.'
He also noted that Loubser referenced a 2024 Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) judgment concerning the extradition of South Africa-born artist Johnathan Schultz.
The SCA found that the NPA lacked the legal authority to request extradition, as that power resides with the Minister of Justice.
Mhaga revealed that the NPA has already moved to challenge that ruling.
'For the record, we have filed an application for leave to appeal against it in the Constitutional Court, albeit on limited grounds.
The NPA stated that it will consider the technicality to determine how much it influences the decision on whether or not to appeal the judgment.
NOW READ: 'What if she went on holiday': Hawks investigator grilled on 'surprise' US trip for Magashule's ex-PA
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
14 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The NPA illustrates the rot within South African institutions
The decision by the Free State High Court to withdraw charges against Moroadi Cholota, the former assistant to former ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule, reveals the level of crisis within the NPA. But the NPA is just one example of a government institution in which officials either resist change or simply refuse to work, often aided by politicians. There will, no doubt, be several legal examinations of Tuesday's decision, in which Judge Phillip Loubser said his court had no authority to try former Free State premier Ace Magashule's former assistant, Moroadi Cholota, because the NPA had instituted her extradition from the US, while legally it should have been the Justice Ministry. While the legal correctness of this decision might be examined by higher courts, the public perception is likely to be dominated by a question of why legal technicalities matter so much. Of course, to lawyers, judges and the rule of law, they absolutely matter. But to many people, they are simply a way for people to avoid justice. The best example of this is former president Jacob Zuma, who has been able to avoid a fair trial since 2003. No accountability for the powerful The message this sends is that there is no accountability for those in power. But it also suggests that despite the reams of evidence heard at the Zondo commission, and the findings that it made, no convictions will come from it. For the moment, it seems that there is no big desire by voters to change our legal system, to remove some of the rights of those accused of wrongdoing. Considering our past, this is entirely legitimate. But if those in power continue to be able to avoid accountability, it is likely that first, trust in the justice system will continue to decline, and second, parties that propose limiting the rights of the accused will grow stronger. One of the important lessons from the NPA is that despite having independent leadership that appears determined to deliver justice, the institution itself is still very weak. The history of how the NPA was captured was being written almost in real time. People like Lawrence Mrwebi or Nomgcobo Jiba were in leadership positions there for many months. Both were found by the courts to be 'not fit and proper' for their positions. During the time they were there, it is likely that they packed the NPA with people who either supported their views or would never challenge their views. Ramaphosa But politicians have played an important role in keeping the NPA weak, too. Perhaps the person who has played the biggest role in weakening the NPA is President Cyril Ramaphosa. One of the important figures in the NPA during the State Capture period was the head of prosecutions in Johannesburg, Andrew Chauke. He was involved in delaying cases against former Gauteng Health MEC Brian Hlongwe and helped to bring a now debunked case against former KwaZulu-Natal Hawks Head Johann Booysen (Chauke has delivered a robust response to the claims against him, including in a TV interview with this writer). In 2023, National Director of Public Prosecutions Shamila Batohi formally asked Ramaphosa to suspend him from his position (under the law, only the President can suspend someone in this job). Two years later, Justice Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi said that the matter was at an 'advanced stage'. This is nonsense. If Ramaphosa really believed in the rule of law, and if he wanted a properly independent NPA, he would have suspended Chauke the moment he could. Worse for the NPA has been the Justice Ministry's refusal to share the Zondo commission database with it. Again, this must be deliberate. Even if there is some legal reason to make this difficult for the NPA, this would be for the courts hearing State Capture prosecutions to determine, not the Justice Ministry. However, it must be remembered that the situation at the NPA is repeated in many other institutions. Culture of resistance On Monday, the chair of the National Lotteries Commission, Barney Pityana, told 702's Bongani Bingwa about the difficulties he is facing in fixing the organisation, after the incredible corruption that happened there. Pityana appeared to be particularly critical of former Department of Trade, Industry and Competition minister Ebrahim Patel. One of his problems is that only the minister can appoint distributing agents to distribute funds, and the commission only had two or three when it should have had 11. As Pityana put it, 'For a long time, minister Patel was stuck with this appointment for reasons best known to him.' Pityana also said that within the organisation, 'There's internal resistance to some of the changes being made in the organisation, therefore compliance, we admit, has been a very difficult issue.' Pityana is almost pointing to a culture of people in important organisations that resist change. In some cases, it may simply be that they do not believe there is any reason for change. Or that workers in many government institutions feel that there is no reason for them to work, because it seems virtually impossible for them to be fired. The Sunday Times published an important report last weekend about the situation in Gauteng metros. It would appear that many permanently employed workers tell bosses that they can't be fired, and thus can't be forced to work. This culture has been evident in councils for many years. It could explain why services do not improve, whether it is a DA-led coalition taking over from an ANC-led coalition or the other way round. This toxic mix of a refusal by workers to change, and political interference (or so often just a refusal to act), may help to explain why so many institutions are not improving. Unfortunately, coalition politics is unlikely to make major changes. In institutions where this culture exists, workers may feel they can just outlast a new boss, knowing that they will still be there after she becomes frustrated and leaves. Ministers and others with political authority are likely to continue interfering or just doing nothing. This means that we can continue to expect the NPA, and so many institutions like it, to simply keep stumbling. DM
Daily Maverick
14 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
NPA's series of legal bungles undermines public confidence in SA's justice system
There is a well-known, albeit facetious, saying in legal circles in the United States of America that underscores the ease with which prosecutors can obtain indictments from grand juries: 'A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich.' While one might accuse National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) Advocate Shamila Batohi of a litany of missteps, the one charge that could never justifiably be levelled against her is that she has lived up to the expectations of her office since her appointment six years ago. Let me explain. Having assumed her role as head of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) amid much fanfare and soaring expectations, Batohi's palpable urgency to atone for the prosecutorial authority's past and current failings is unmistakable. Yet, her tenure has been marked by a series of high-profile and, some would argue, spectacular missteps — ranging from the bungled prosecutions of the Gupta brothers, Matshela Koko and Timothy Omotoso, to the recent handling of allegations against Moroadi Cholota in the ongoing corruption case involving former Free State Premier Ace Magashule. Collectively, these failings have arguably inflicted greater damage on the credibility of the NPA and the rule of law than the cumulative legacy of all her predecessors. Were it not for the grave consequences of judicial rebukes in response to the NPA's prosecutorial blunders, one might be forgiven for mistaking the NPA for a travelling act worthy of challenging the Boswell Wilkie Circus. However, unlike a circus — whose purpose is to entertain — the NPA is a constitutionally empowered institution entrusted with the solemn duty of advancing justice, upholding the rule of law and prosecuting crime without fear, favour or prejudice. That such an institution should repeatedly find itself the subject of judicial reprimand is not merely embarrassing — it undermines public confidence in the justice system itself. One could hardly blame discerning observers for believing that, under Batohi's tenure, failure is not merely tolerated but has become an aspirational key performance indicator. Cholota, who stood as a co-accused alongside her former boss, Magashule, and 16 others, challenged the lawfulness of her extradition from the United States last year — and, by extension, the court's jurisdiction to prosecute her. In its ruling, the court relied on a precedent established by the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in a judgment handed down in 2023. That judgment held, in essence, that the legal authority to initiate an extradition request resides with the minister of justice — not the NPA — despite the NPA having routinely made such requests over the past three decades. It was both disheartening and troubling to witness NPA spokesperson Mthunzi Mhaga attributing the institution's prosecutorial failures to the vast financial resources available to State Capture architects and other wealthy criminally accused individuals — resources, he argued, being used strategically to frustrate and delay their prosecution. While the challenge posed by well-resourced defendants is real, such assertions ring hollow in light of the judiciary's own findings. In his damning ruling, Justice Phillip Loubser did not merely express concern; he unequivocally excoriated the NPA for its conduct in the matter. He found that the NPA had played fast and loose with the truth in its hasty and procedurally flawed attempt to secure Cholota's extradition. The judgment laid bare a deeper institutional malaise: not simply a matter of being outgunned by wealthy adversaries, but one of poor preparation, disregard for legal procedure and a troubling erosion of prosecutorial integrity. If ineptitude is the defining hallmark of the NPA under Batohi's leadership, then profound disappointment has become the enduring emblem for the countless victims of serious crime in our society — victims left disillusioned by a prosecutorial authority seemingly adrift in its constitutional mandate. With less than a year remaining before Batohi's fixed term as NDPP comes to an end, there is no gainsaying the reality that the unresolved prosecutions of the Guptas, Koko, Omotoso and others — each emblematic of the NPA's faltering pursuit of justice — are likely to persist long after her departure. These high-profile matters, burdened by delays, procedural missteps and institutional dysfunction, have come to symbolise the authority's inability to translate public expectations into prosecutorial outcomes. Indeed, a defining feature of Batohi's tenure will not be prosecutorial triumphs, but rather the steady drumbeat of judicial excoriations — pointed and public rebukes that have laid bare the NPA's chronic inefficiencies and, at times, apparent disregard for legal standards. As the nation reflects on her legacy, what will remain is a prosecuting authority still in search of credibility, and a public whose faith in the justice system has been further eroded by yet another era of unfulfilled promise. Such prosecutorial recklessness, particularly when juxtaposed with its consistent failure to hold wealthy and politically connected individuals to account, has not only emboldened the accused but has also critically weakened the institution itself. In medical terms, the result would resemble septicaemia: a toxic, self-inflicted infection coursing through the prosecutorial bloodstream — threatening institutional paralysis and, in extreme cases, death. DM
The South African
16 hours ago
- The South African
Will Joslin Smith state witness get indemnity or face JAIL?
The state witness in the Joslin Smith trafficking trial, Laurentia Lombaard, is awaiting her fate of indemnity or a prison sentence in a special hearing under the Western Cape High Court. The woman – a former accused who turned State 204 witness – has previously stated under oath that the missing girl's mother, Kelly Smith, allegedly sold her daughter to a sangoma for R20 000. Last week, Kelly, her boyfriend Jacquin 'Boeta' Appollis, and pal Steveno van Rhyn were sentenced to life in prison for trafficking and kidnapping. The trio has 14 days to apply for leave to appeal the sentence. Joslin went missing from her home in Saldanha Bay on 19 February 2024. She has not been found. Speaking to the SABC, National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) prosecutor Zelda Swanepoel revealed Western Cape High Court Judge Nathan Erasmus would hear evidence and arguments from both the prosecution and the defense pertaining to state witness, Laurentia Lombaard. He would impose her sentence in a separate hearing. Swanepoel said: 'We will be called upon to argue and indicate why we say she should or should not be granted indemnity. 'Our argument is that she should be granted indemnity.' State witness Lourentia Lombaard testified that Kelly Smith sold her daughter Joslin to a sangoma. Will she be granted indemnity for her testimony? Images via YouTube screenshot: SABC News. Laurentia Lombaard – a State 204 witness – previously stated under oath that Joslin Smith's mother, Kelly Smith, allegedly sold her to a sangoma for R20 000. Lombaard also claimed in her testimony that Kelly had offered her R1 000 in 'hush money'. She added that she had not received the money, even after confronting Kelly about it. Late last year, charges were withdrawn against Lombaard, who was granted provisional indemnity from criminal prosecution. However, her credibility was questioned when she admitted to lying to police in a recorded statement after Joslin Smith's disappearance. Her version of events from her March 2024 statement differs from her confession to police in October, when she agreed to turn state witness. In court, she admitted to being under the influence of drugs when making the initial statement. According to the Criminal Procedure Act, a Section 204 witness can receive indemnity from criminal charges, provided that their testimony and evidence help incriminate the accused. In the case of Joslin Smith, the NPA offered Lombaard witness protection in exchange for her testimony against Kelly Smith, Boeta Appollis, and Steveno van Rhyn, who have since been convicted and sentenced. If the court does find that Lombaard did not testify truthfully, she could face prosecution for perjury and related charges. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 . Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp , Facebook , X, and Bluesky for the latest news.
