Raduvha v Minister of Safety and Security and Another

The applicant, Ms Michell Joyce Raduvha, was 15 years old when she was arrested by members of the South African Police Service on 6 April 2008. Police officers attended her family home to arrest her mother for allegedly contravening a protection order. The applicant intervened by physically interposing herself between her mother and the police officers in an attempt to prevent the arrest. The officers regarded this as wilful obstruction of their lawful duties and arrested the applicant under section 40(1)(j) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977. She was forcibly placed in a police vehicle, taken to a police station, and detained overnight for approximately 19 hours, despite her father being present. She was released on warning the following day, and the Public Prosecutor later declined to prosecute her. The applicant instituted a civil claim for damages for unlawful arrest and detention, which was dismissed by the High Court and the Full Court before reaching the Constitutional Court.

The appeal was upheld with costs. The orders of the trial court and the Full Court were set aside. The Minister of Police was declared liable to the applicant for damages arising from her unlawful arrest and detention. The matter was remitted to the Gauteng Local Division of the High Court, Johannesburg, for determination of the quantum of damages.

This case is a landmark decision on the constitutional protection of children in conflict with the law. It affirms that police powers of arrest must be exercised consistently with section 28 of the Constitution and clarifies that the best interests of the child are paramount in decisions to arrest and detain. The judgment limits a purely mechanical application of section 40 of the Criminal Procedure Act and qualifies the approach adopted in Sekhoto by emphasising constitutional scrutiny, particularly where children are involved.