Shebeshxt remains in jail as court dismisses bail bid on “no new facts” finding

The Polokwane Magistrate’s Court has refused bail for controversial Limpopo artist Lehlogonolo Chauke, known as Shebeshxt, after Magistrate Godfrey Netshiozwi ruled that the applicant failed to establish the existence of new facts amounting to exceptional circumstances.

Chauke, who made a third bail application based on alleged new facts, is still in custody after a ruling based on Section 60 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 and Section 35(1)(f) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, which requires the accused to prove that their release is in the interests of justice.

In delivering judgment, Netshiozwi held that the defence had not discharged the evidentiary burden of demonstrating that the circumstances relied upon constituted genuinely new or supervening facts.

The court found that the material placed before it amounted to a repetition and embellishment of facts previously considered during earlier bail proceedings, rather than a legally recognisable change in circumstances.

“The so-called new facts relied upon are, in substance, an embroidery of circumstances that were already known and considered at the time of the initial bail application,” the court found.

The magistrate emphasised that South African bail jurisprudence requires that a renewed application must be founded on a material change in circumstances and not a re-litigation of issues already adjudicated.

Right to approach court of competent jurisdiction

The court held that bail proceedings are governed by the principle that an accused must demonstrate on a balance of probabilities that exceptional circumstances exist that justify release in the interests of justice.

Netshiozwi ruled that the applicant had failed to meet this threshold, finding no sufficient evidentiary basis to justify a departure from the previous refusal of bail, which had also been upheld on appeal.

The court further noted that where no new facts are established, the legal position remains that the status quo prevails, which means continued detention pending trial.

The state opposed the application, arguing that the alleged medical condition, personal circumstances, and other reliance factors were already before the court in previous bail proceedings and therefore could not be reintroduced as “new facts”.

Prosecutors said that bail proceedings are not meant to reopen closed decisions or act as a reconsideration of previously rejected applications unless there is a real change in the facts.

In conclusion, Netshiozwi noted that while the current application is refused, the accused retains the right to approach a court of competent jurisdiction should genuinely new facts arise in the future, as contemplated in bail jurisprudence.

The court emphasised that its role is to apply the law to the facts before it, and on the present record, the interests of justice did not favour release.

Chauke remains in custody pending trial.

Visit SW YouTube Channel for our video content