Man runs in front of a moving truck
VEREENIGING.- A bloodied Mjayeli Security Services uniform might be the only thing left that could prove the identity of a man that allegedly threw himself in front of a moving truck on the Boy Louw Road, near Steelpark, Vereeniging on Tuesday evening.
It is said that on Tuesday evening a truck driver was driving at Boy Louw, Vereeniging direction, when he suddenly saw an unknown person waving in the road and further ran in front of the moving truck.
He then tried to avoid him, but (unfortunately) it was already late.
'The African male did not have any identification document/card on him, but he had Mjayeli Security Services uniform in his possession. He was declared dead on the scene by Emergency Medical Services and taken to Forensic Pathology Services for further investigation, said Police spokesperson, Sergeant Nthabiseng Mokhachane.
She further advised, 'To enhance safety while walking at night, pedestrians should prioritize visibility and be aware of their surroundings. Wearing bright or reflective clothing, carrying a flashlight, and walking on the right-hand side of the road (where possible) are key strategies. Additionally, pedestrians should avoid crossing in the middle of the street and make eye contact with drivers before crossing.'
The Station Commander Brigadier Sibongile Ndaba would like to thank the SAPS members, EMS, and Emfuleni Traffic for their speedy response to the scene, as their swift response made it easier for other motorists to use the road.
Any person who may need Vereeniging police can contact Vereeniging SAPS on 082 558 2348, 10111, 08600 10111, 112 or alternatively via MySAPS
At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
3 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Illicit financial flows are derailing Africa's future
Illicit financial flows (IFFs) continue to undermine the future of Africa, hampering the ability of governments to adequately fund education, healthcare and development projects essential for lifting people out of poverty and fostering sustainable economic growth. As business leaders, politicians, academics and citizens, we cannot sit back. We must help curb the illegal flow of money out of our country through a cohesive effort by all stakeholders, both local and international, to ensure safeguards are put in place, laws are harmonised, and all enforcement agencies work together to address the problem. At the same time, we must not do anything that will deter investment. Ahead of G20 summit in Johannesburg in November, as well precursor meetings — such as the G20 finance ministers' and central bank governors' meeting and the T20 midterm conference held this month — we must formulate proposals that integrate the perspectives of public and private sector institutions, nonprofit organisations, think-tanks and universities. Together we can make valuable policy recommendations, such as using AI to turn vast amounts of data into information for developing strategic interventions. Working alongside each other, we can identify gaps in current legal frameworks and areas where greater co-operation is required. We must seek ways to stem illicit money flows. When individuals or companies evade their tax obligations, deliberately falsify import or export documents, or misappropriate funds intended for development projects, they are not committing victimless crimes. These outflows not only weaken our reputation in the eyes of the international markets, but also make it harder for the government to raise capital at manageable interest rates. We already owe too much: the National Treasury predicts that debt on our national balance sheet will be 77% of GDP this year. IFFs directly undermine economic growth, costing the South African economy the equivalent of almost 5% of annual collected tax revenue — losses of about R92.5bn. On the African continent, the numbers are more alarming, with between $50bn (about R889bn) and $90bn stolen annually, according to the UN. A 2020 report from a UN conference on trade and development states that IFFs represent as much as 3.7% of Africa's GDP. This figure has almost certainly grown since then, given that those who break laws will keep doing so if they are not held accountable. We recently convened a G20 multi-stakeholder dialogue to better understand this challenge, quantify its impact, assess current solutions, and identify new ones . One of our speakers, deputy minister of international relations and co-operation Alvin Botes, spelt out what this theft means: countries with high IFFs spend at least 25% less on healthcare and 50% less on education compared with their peers. IFFs wipe out any good the $65bn in aid Africa receives each year might do. They reduce progress made in making people's lives better. There are initiatives under way to address IFFs. For example, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) collaborates with the UN to strengthen countries' financial systems and prevent illicit outflows. While South Africa's inclusion on the FATF's grey list is viewed by some as an embarrassment, it enables us to strengthen our legal and regulatory frameworks, as well as enhance our anti-money-laundering capabilities. While South Africa's inclusion on the FATF's grey list is viewed by some as an embarrassment, it enables us to strengthen our legal and regulatory frameworks, as well as enhance our anti-money-laundering capabilities. We are also seeing prosecutions of high-level fraudsters, especially those who use dubious accounting methods to move money around and avoid paying their fair share of taxes. It is gratifying to see that action has been taken in this regard. Other UN entities have developed discussion platforms and measurement systems. There are 10 asset-recovery inter-agency networks that have 178 member countries, allowing illicit money flows to be traced across borders. In addition, Interpol supports national and international law enforcement agencies to investigate, trace and prosecute those responsible for these crimes. We must all strive towards expanding such interventions, as well as advocate for and enable closer alignment between government departments and between local law enforcement agencies and their international counterparts. However, our solutions must not cause more harm than good by discouraging legitimate investment. We should not, for example, implement unfair tax regimes that could result in capital flight. We must also not inhibit international investment inflows by making it nearly impossible to comply with legislation and regulations. Such a state of affairs would merely encourage companies to operate businesses in sectors such as import and export under the radar. Through working together by sharing data, harmonising laws and holding those responsible for IFFs accountable, we can strengthen the economy by plugging the holes through which money leaks and encouraging investment. Our people deserve nothing less.
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
‘Using k-word is illegal': Northern Cape teacher fired for racist outburst loses reinstatement battle
He was dismissed last year after being found guilty at a disciplinary hearing of calling two African pupils the k-word. A teacher in the Northern Cape has failed in his attempt to return to work after being dismissed for using a racial slur against two black pupils. Gerhard Louw took the Northern Cape department of education to the Education Labour Relations Council, arguing that his dismissal was unfair. At the time, Louw was employed at Technical High School Kimberley, where he taught technology and automotive subjects. He was dismissed in November last year after being found guilty at a disciplinary hearing of calling two African pupils the k-word. The arbitration proceedings were held on 8 April and 22 May. Pupils testify after Northern Cape teacher appeals dismissal over k-word During the hearings, the provincial department called two pupils to testify. The first witness, a Grade 12 at the time of the incident, said she was among seven girls who were transferred from the Northern Cape High School hostel to the Technical High School hostel on the evening of 23 June 2024. Upon their arrival, Louw – who was one of the supervisors at the hostel – emerged from his residence and expressed displeasure at the girls being relocated to 'his hostel'. She testified that Louw conveyed his frustration to their driver, Mr Tshabalala. After Tshabalala returned to the vehicle, Louw allegedly approached her and another pupil and accused them of tarnishing the school's reputation, then called them the k-word. ALSO READ: Racism in schools: born-free generation faces lingering inequality challenges She said that both she and the other pupil were shocked, as they had done or said nothing to provoke such language. She also indicated that a third pupil might have overheard the incident. The pupil added during cross-examination that they reported the incident to their families and the hostel's centre manager instead of Tshabalala, who was the groundsman and head of security. Tshabalala later advised them to report the matter to the authorities once schools reopened. The second witness, who was the third pupil mentioned, confirmed the first witness's testimony and added that Louw had yelled at the girls in the presence of his wife. Northern Cape teacher denies using racial slur Louw testified as the sole witness in his own defence. He stated that at the time of the incident, the hostel was occupied by boys attending winter school and that he felt it was inappropriate for girls to stay there as well. The teacher claimed to have warned the girls that they would be asked to leave if they did not behave. Louw insisted he could not recall using the k-word. He also contended that neither school management nor Tshabalala informed him of the allegations and he only became aware of the matter weeks later when he was served with legal documents. READ MORE: Eastern Cape teacher fails to get job back after being fired for fabricating marks of 200 matric pupils According to Louw, he never saw the girls again after the incident. During cross-examination, Louw admitted to being angry during the interaction, but again denied using the racial slur. He also said he could have called his wife and a second person to support his version of events, as they were present during the conversation. Louw asked for reinstatement on the grounds of what he claimed was unfair dismissal. Arbitrator upholds dismissal In a 5 June ruling, the arbitrator found that the testimonies of the two pupils were credible and consistent, making them reliable witnesses. 'A mere denial by the applicant is not enough to sustain a plea of not guilty when faced by allegations of this nature. 'The usage of the word 'k****r' is not just illegal and degrading to the humanity and dignity of the learners, but it reminds us all of the horrible past of our country,' the award reads. The arbitrator also pointed out that Louw agreed with almost every detail of the pupils' accounts, except the use of the racial slur. 'If the applicant was really truthful about this, surely his wife and Mrs van der Lith would not have deemed it troublesome to come to this council and to corroborate his version.' Describing Louw's conduct as 'despicable', the arbitrator concluded that the teacher being fired was an appropriate sanction and 'a matter of last resort'. Therefore, the dismissal was 'substantively fair'. 'In this democratic South Africa, people like the applicant are anti-transformation and should not be allowed near children and the good citizenry of our society.' NOW READ: Can you get fired for being racist? Here is what employers and employees need to know
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
EXPLAINER-What is the International Criminal Court?
THE HAGUE, June 5 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump's administration on Thursday imposed sanctions on four judges at the International Criminal Court, an unprecedented retaliation over the tribunal's work on issuing an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Here are some facts about the court: WHEN WAS THE ICC SET UP AND WHY? The court was established in 2002 to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and the crime of aggression when member states are unwilling or unable to do so themselves. It can prosecute crimes committed by nationals of member states or on the territory of member states by other actors. It has 125 member states. The court's budget for 2025 is about 195 million euros ($202 million). WHAT IS THE ICC INVESTIGATING? The ICC is conducting investigations from the Palestinian territories to Ukraine and African states such as Uganda, Democratic Republic of Congo and Kenya, to Venezuela in Latin America and Myanmar and the Philippines in Asia. It says there have been 32 cases before the court, with some having more than one suspect. ICC judges have issued at least 60 arrest warrants. HOW MANY PEOPLE HAS THE COURT CONVICTED? ICC judges have issued 11 convictions and four acquittals. Twenty-one people have been held in the ICC detention centre in The Hague and have appeared before the court, and 31 people remain at large. Charges have been dropped against seven people due to their deaths. Of the 11 convictions, only six have been for the court's core crimes of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The others were for crimes such as witness tampering. The six convicted men were all African militia leaders from Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali and Uganda. Terms ranged from nine to 30 years in prison. The maximum possible term is life imprisonment. WHO IS ON THE COURT'S ARREST WARRANT LIST? Former Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested on March 11 on a warrant from the ICC. Prosecutors accuse him of forming and arming death squads held responsible for the killing of thousands of perceived drug users and dealers during his rule. Duterte has said he takes full responsibility for the 'war on drugs' as he braces for the legal battle. Other notable ICC suspects are Netanyahu, who is accused of being criminally responsible for acts including murder, persecution and using starvation as a weapon of war in the Gaza conflict, and Russian President Vladimir Putin, accused of the war crime of illegally deporting hundreds of children from Ukraine. Both Israel and Russia have repeatedly denied that their forces have committed atrocities in Gaza and Ukraine respectively and have argued the ICC has no jurisdiction over them. When it issued the warrant for Netanyahu, the ICC also issued a warrant for the arrest of Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif, whose death was confirmed after the warrant was issued. The ICC prosecutor has also requested arrest warrants for senior Afghan and Myanmar leaders, but those have not been officially approved by judges. WHICH COUNTRIES ARE NOT MEMBERS OF THE ICC? Although the court is supported by many United Nations members and the European Union, other countries such as the United States, China and Russia are not members, arguing the ICC could be used for politically motivated prosecutions. Myanmar is not a member of the court, but in 2018 and 2019 judges ruled the court had jurisdiction over alleged cross-border crimes that partially took place in neighbouring ICC member Bangladesh, such as deportation and persecution, and said prosecutors could open a formal investigation. Israel is not a member and does not recognise its jurisdiction, but the Palestinian territories were admitted as an ICC member state in 2015. This, together with a ruling by judges, means the court can look at potential war crimes carried out by Hamas fighters in Israel and by Israelis in the Gaza Strip. The Philippines is not currently a member of the ICC but was between 2011 and 2019, when the unilateral withdrawal by Duterte became final. Under the court's founding 1998 Rome Statute, even if a state withdraws as a member it retains jurisdiction over crimes within its jurisdiction committed during the membership period. In February 2025, Trump authorised economic and travel sanctions targeting people who work on International Criminal Court investigations of U.S. citizens or U.S. allies such as Israel. Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan has so far been the only ICC staff member targeted by sanctions, which are set to go into force on April 7.
