Joe “Ferrari” Sibanyoni and his co-accused had the matter against them struck from the court roll earlier this week.
Image: Screenshot/TikTok
Earlier this week, the nation was left shell-shocked when the case against taxi kingpin Joe ‘Ferrari’ Sibanyoni was struck from the court roll.
On Monday, tensions flared in the Kwaggafontein Magistrate’s Court, with Sibanyoni’s lawyer, former National Director of Public Prosecutions Shaun Abrahams, highly agitated following proceedings delays.
Sibanyoni, Bafana Sindane, Mvimbi Daniel Masilela, and Philemon Msiza face charges of money laundering and extortion.
It is alleged that the group extorted more than R2 million in ‘protection fees’ from a mining businessman between 2022 and 2025.
This was after the state prosecutor failed to pitch at court for proceedings which were supposed to begin at 9 am.
Abrahams brought an application from the defence calling for action to be taken against the prosecutor and the matter to either be struck from the court roll or the accused be released on bail.
The magistrate deliberated her judgment after 1pm, with the state prosecutor still not present, and found him in contempt of court. She further struck the matter off the court roll, which resulted in the eruption of loud cheers from the public gallery.
So while the nation remains shocked at how this high-profile matter can just be removed from the court’s roll, not many people know what this truly means.
IOL reached out to Dr Suhayfa Bhamjee, a senior lecturer at the UKZN’s School of Law, who explained what this meant.
“When a criminal case is struck off the court roll, it means that the court has removed the matter from its active list because it cannot proceed at that point in time. This typically arises where the prosecution is not ready—whether due to absent witnesses, incomplete investigations, or other procedural shortcomings. Importantly, this is not a decision on the merits of the case: the accused is neither convicted nor acquitted,” she said.
Instead, the proceedings are effectively paused, with the State retaining the ability to reinstate the case once it is properly prepared.
“For the accused, the immediate legal consequences are significant. Once a matter is struck off the roll, the accused is no longer formally before the court on that charge. Any bail conditions fall away, and the coercive authority of the court ceases to operate in relation to that case. Where an accused has been held in custody pending trial, the legal basis for that detention also falls away. In those circumstances, the accused must be released, unless there is some other lawful ground for their continued detention,” Dr Bhamjee said.
She stated that in practical terms, this means that the accused do indeed walk free at that point. However, it is critical to emphasise that this does not amount to a final resolution of the matter.
“The accused have not been acquitted, and the charges have not been finally disposed of. The State remains entitled to revive the prosecution, either by re-enrolling the matter or by re-arresting or summoning the accused to court. The freedom that follows a striking-off order is therefore immediate, but not definitive,” Dr Bhamjee said.
However, she said striking the matter off the court roll does have certain practical advantages from the State’s perspective.
“It allows the prosecution the opportunity to effectively ‘get its ducks in a row’ before bringing the matter back to court. In theory, this should result in a more trial-ready case when it is re-enrolled, with witnesses secured and investigations complete. Ideally, this reduces the cycle of repeated postponements and last-minute adjournments, thereby promoting a more efficient and focused prosecution once proceedings resume,” she said.
While the magistrate has the authority to strike a matter off the roll, such a decision is not beyond challenge.
Dr Bhamjee said the matter could be taken on review to the High Court, particularly where it is alleged that the decision was irregular, disproportionate, or not in the interests of justice.
In practice, however, the State will often address the underlying issue, such as securing witnesses or completing the investigation and simply re-enrol the matter. Any misconduct on the part of a prosecutor may also be dealt with through internal processes within the National Prosecuting Authority.
“In the present context, it is important to note that the defence placed alternative remedies before the court. While they did seek the striking off of the roll, this was advanced as one of two possible outcomes. The other option squarely before the court was the granting of bail, subject to appropriate conditions, including the surrender of passports, regular reporting to a police station, and other measures designed to ensure the accused’s continued attendance in court,” Dr Bhamjee said.
“Against that backdrop, there is a persuasive argument that the preferable approach would have been to grant bail on suitable conditions and postpone the matter to a fixed return date. Such an approach would have protected the liberty interests of the accused while maintaining judicial oversight and continuity of the proceedings, avoiding the procedural reset that follows when a matter is struck off the roll,” Dr Bhamjee said.
She further added that while the magistrate’s frustration may well have been justified, the decision to strike the matter off the roll appears, on this view, to have gone a step further than was necessary in the circumstances.
In a statement released by the National Director of Public Prosecutions, Advocate Andy Mothibi, said disciplinary action will be taken against the prosecutor who has since been suspended.
“While this is disappointing, it is not a setback as we are within our right and authority to reinstate the case once there is compliance with the legal provisions governing matters removed from the court roll in this manner. There is no room for impunity as we remain resolute in our constitutional obligation to hold those accused of criminality accountable,” Mothiba said.
Police spokesperson, Colonel Mavela Masondo, said Mpumalanga police believe that there is still a strong case against the four suspects.
“The SAPS has noted that the matter was struck off the court roll after the prosecutor failed to appear in court. The SAPS Mpumalanga Organised Crime Unit maintains that it still has a strong case despite the latest developments. The Organised Crime Investigation was conducted; hence, all four suspects were arrested, and the case was initially enrolled, then the bail application process was initiated. Strong evidence against the suspects with regard to the matter remains intact. The SAPS will continue with engagement with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) regarding the case,” Masondo said.
robin.francke@iol.co.za
IOL