Johannes Myeni v The State

The appellant, Johannes Myeni, was convicted in the regional court of raping his six-year-old daughter during 1989 and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. The complainant testified that the appellant repeatedly removed her from her shared bed and had sexual intercourse with her over a period of approximately six months. Medical evidence supported chronic sexual trauma consistent with abuse that could have occurred as far back as 1989. After his conviction, the appellant appealed and successfully applied for the matter to be remitted for the hearing of two further defence witnesses: an alleged boyfriend of the complainant who claimed to have had consensual sexual intercourse with her years later, and a woman who alleged that the complainant had been influenced by her mother and grandmother to lay the charge. After the remittal, the magistrate refused to recall the complainant for further cross-examination, convicted the appellant again, and imposed the same sentence. A further appeal was dismissed by the High Court, but leave to appeal was granted to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was dismissed and the conviction and sentence of ten years’ imprisonment were confirmed.

The case is important for clarifying the strict common-law requirements for remittal of criminal cases to hear further evidence and warning against the dangers of fabricated post-conviction testimony. It provides authoritative guidance on the application of s 227(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act (rape-shield provisions), emphasising the distinction between relevance to issues and mere attacks on credibility, and aligning South African law with comparative international jurisprudence on protecting complainants in sexual offence trials.