The State v Boesman Mahomotsa

The respondent was convicted in a regional court on two counts of rape committed on different occasions in 1998, after the commencement of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 105 of 1997. In both instances he abducted young female complainants from public places, threatened them with weapons, detained them in his room, and raped each complainant more than once. The regional court committed him to the High Court for sentencing because the offences attracted mandatory life imprisonment. The High Court found substantial and compelling circumstances and imposed sentences of 6 and 10 years’ imprisonment, to run concurrently. The State appealed against the alleged leniency of these sentences.

The appeal was upheld. The sentences of 6 and 10 years’ imprisonment were set aside and replaced with sentences of 8 years’ imprisonment on count 1 and 12 years’ imprisonment on count 2, ante-dated to 30 June 1999.

The case clarifies the application of the minimum sentencing regime for rape under the Criminal Law Amendment Act. It confirms that factors such as virility, youth alone, or a complainant’s prior sexual activity cannot constitute substantial and compelling circumstances. It reinforces the proportionality approach to minimum sentences and provides guidance on when appellate courts may interfere with sentences imposed under the Act.