The Minister of Police v Stanfield and Others

In June 2014 the South African Police Service seized firearms from the respondents under a search and seizure warrant issued in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. The respondents were arrested and charged with offences relating to the alleged unlawful issuing of firearm licences. Although the charges were provisionally withdrawn pending authorisation from the National Director of Public Prosecutions, the respondents applied to the Gauteng Division of the High Court for the return of the firearms under s 31(1)(a) of the CPA, alternatively for an enquiry under s 102 of the Firearms Control Act 60 of 2000. The High Court held that criminal proceedings were not pending but ordered an enquiry under s 102 due to concerns about the lawfulness of the licences. The Minister of Police appealed. During the appeal, further evidence showed that the NDPP had authorised prosecution, summonses were issued, and criminal proceedings were in fact pending.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The High Court order directing an enquiry under s 102 of the Firearms Control Act was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the respondents’ application with costs.

The case clarifies the interpretation of s 31(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Act, confirming that provisional withdrawal of charges does not mean criminal proceedings are not pending where there is a reasonable likelihood of prosecution. It reinforces the onus on applicants seeking return of seized items and affirms SAPS’ authority to retain firearms pending criminal proceedings.