Sanderson v Attorney-General, Eastern Cape

In late 1994 the appellant, a primary school deputy head and public figure, was investigated for alleged indecent acts with two schoolgirls under section 14(1)(b) of the Sexual Offences Act 23 of 1957. He was informally arrested on 1 December 1994, appeared in court the following day, and was repeatedly remanded without formal charges. A decision to prosecute was taken in August 1995, but a formal charge sheet was only served in May 1996. The trial was postponed several times due to administrative and witness-related issues. Before the trial commenced, the appellant applied to the High Court for a permanent stay of prosecution, alleging that the delay violated his constitutional right under section 25(3)(a) of the interim Constitution to a trial within a reasonable time. The High Court dismissed the application, and the appellant appealed to the Constitutional Court.

The appeal was dismissed. The order of the High Court refusing a permanent stay of prosecution was confirmed.

This case is a leading South African authority on the constitutional right to a trial within a reasonable time. It clarifies that the right protects liberty, security, and fair trial interests, including non-trial-related prejudice, and establishes a balancing test for assessing unreasonable delay. It also confirms that a permanent stay of prosecution is an exceptional remedy, particularly in serious criminal matters.