Members of the South African Police Service, acting on informant information, conducted warrantless searches on 14 March 2011 at two premises in Cape Town leased by the respondent, Ms Grace Nomazizi Kunjana. Relying on section 11(1)(a) and (g) of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992, police searched the premises without a warrant and seized large quantities of Mandrax tablets, smaller quantities of Tik, and over R1.8 million in cash. The respondent was arrested and charged with possession of and dealing in drugs, with the criminal trial pending. She challenged the constitutionality of section 11, contending that the warrantless search and seizure powers infringed her constitutional right to privacy.
The declaration of constitutional invalidity of section 11(1)(a) and (g) of the Drugs and Drug Trafficking Act 140 of 1992 was confirmed. The declaration of invalidity applies prospectively from the date of the Constitutional Court’s order. The Minister of Police and the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services were ordered, jointly and severally, to pay the respondent’s costs, including the costs of two counsel, up to 13 January 2016.
This case reinforces the centrality of the right to privacy in South African constitutional law and affirms that warrantless search and seizure powers must be narrowly tailored and accompanied by adequate safeguards. It forms part of a consistent Constitutional Court jurisprudence rejecting broad legislative authorisations for warrantless searches, and it underscores that exceptions to the warrant requirement should not become the norm, even in the context of serious crime such as drug trafficking.