Dr Nandipha Magudumana was refused appeal bid by High court

Judge upholds arrest and repatriation of contended abettor of condemned killer and robber con Thabo Bester.
The Free State High Court has refused Dr Nandipha Magudumana leave to appeal after chancing that SA felonious courts retain felonious governance over her.

In June judge Phillip Loubser set up that though Magudumana’s junking to SA from Tanzania was a “ disguised repatriation ”, which was unconstitutional, she had acceded to her return. Her concurrence meant SA’s felonious courts retained governance over her.

Loubser said an appeal had no reasonable prospects of success and there were no other compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

Magudumana is the alleged main abettor of condemned killer and robber con Thabo Bester who escaped from the Mangaung Correctional Centre last time.
The judge said Magudumana’s counsel had argued his order was wrong because he didn’t declare the disguised repatriation to be unconstitutional. But he said “ curiously enough, there was no citation in the notice of stir of relief sought on a indigenous base ”.
Loubser said the order Magudumana had sought from the court, as set out in her notice of stir, was to declare her arrest and transportation to SA unlawful. Also, her case was directed at the conduct of the police and not the department of home affairs.

“ Only in her replying affidavit did the aspirant contend that the repatriation disguised as a expatriation is inconsistent with the constitution. Despite this, the notice of stir wasn’t amended, ” said Loubser.
He appertained to former judgments of the Supreme Court of Appeal( SCA) and the indigenous Court, which said that where a protestation of indigenous invalidity was sought an aspirant must “ duly and specifically ” place the issue before the court.
“ The question of whether a person can waive a abecedarian indigenous right thus falls down, ” Loubser said, pertaining to the argument by Magudumana’s attorneys that his judgment raised a new question of law whether a person can assent to a breach of their indigenous rights by the state.

“ The data of the matter don’t pave the way for similar relief, ” Loubser said

He also rejected Magudumana’s argument that any concurrence to her junking from Tanzania had to be in jotting and unambiguous for it to be legal.
Her attorneys had appertained to a judgment from the SCA about what was needed for proper concurrence when it came to an repatriation and another high court judgment that a person can not assent to unconstitutional conduct by the state. They argued these judgments disaccorded with Loubser’s and were a good reason to grant leave to appeal.

Loubser said the government had noway claimed she was subscribing to being extradited. All the government claimed was that she had said she wanted to return home to her children.

The Free State High Court has refused Dr Nandipha Magudumana leave to appeal after chancing that SA felonious courts retain felonious governance over her.

Magudumana is the alleged main abettor of condemned killer and robber con Thabo Bester who escaped from the Mangaung Correctional Centre last time.

In June judge Phillip Loubser set up that though Magudumana’s junking to SA from Tanzania was a “ disguised repatriation ”, which was unconstitutional, she had acceded to her return. Her concurrence meant SA’s felonious courts retained governance over her.

Loubser said an appeal had no reasonable prospects of success and there were no other compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

The judge said Magudumana’s counsel had argued his order was wrong because he didn’t declare the disguised repatriation to be unconstitutional. But he said “ curiously enough, there was no citation in the notice of stir of relief sought on a indigenous base ”.

Loubser said the order Magudumana had sought from the court, as set out in her notice of stir, was to declare her arrest and transportation to SA unlawful. Also, her case was directed at the conduct of the police and not the department of home affairs.

“ Only in her replying affidavit did the aspirant contend that the repatriation disguised as a expatriation is inconsistent with the constitution. Despite this, the notice of stir wasn’t amended, ” said Loubser.

He appertained to former judgments of the Supreme Court of Appeal( SCA) and the indigenous Court, which said that where a protestation of indigenous invalidity was sought an aspirant must “ duly and specifically ” place the issue before the court.

“ The question of whether a person can waive a abecedarian indigenous right thus falls down, ” Loubser said, pertaining to the argument by Magudumana’s attorneys that his judgment raised a new question of law whether a person can assent to a breach of their indigenous rights by the state.

“ The data of the matter don’t pave the way for similar relief, ” Loubser said

He also rejected Magudumana’s argument that any concurrence to her junking from Tanzania had to be in jotting and unambiguous for it to be legal.

Her attorneys had appertained to a judgment from the SCA about what was needed for proper concurrence when it came to an repatriation and another high court judgment that a person can not assent to unconstitutional conduct by the state. They argued these judgments disaccorded with Loubser’s and were a good reason to grant leave to appeal.

Loubser said the government had noway claimed she was subscribing to being extradited. All the government claimed was that she had said she wanted to return home to her children.

“ That was the true nature of her concurrence, ” said the judge.

The cases appertained to by Magudumana’s attorneys were thus distinguishable from the data in this case, he said. Then, there were other judgments, binding on him, which said if someone acceded to their return to SA, the country’s felonious courts would retain governance. One similar judgment specifically said such a return didn’t transgress any abecedarian rights, Loubser said.
“ I’m thus not converted that another court would reach a different decision or that there are other compelling reasons why the matter should do on appeal, ” the judge said.

Magudumana may still supplicate the SCA to appeal.

High court refuses appeal bid by Nandipha Magudumana

Judge upholds arrest and repatriation of contended abettor of condemned killer and robber con Thabo Bester.
The Free State High Court has refused Dr Nandipha Magudumana leave to appeal after chancing that SA felonious courts retain felonious governance over her.

In June judge Phillip Loubser set up that though Magudumana’s junking to SA from Tanzania was a “ disguised repatriation ”, which was unconstitutional, she had acceded to her return. Her concurrence meant SA’s felonious courts retained governance over her.

Loubser said an appeal had no reasonable prospects of success and there were no other compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

Magudumana is the alleged main abettor of condemned killer and robber con Thabo Bester who escaped from the Mangaung Correctional Centre last time.
The judge said Magudumana’s counsel had argued his order was wrong because he didn’t declare the disguised repatriation to be unconstitutional. But he said “ curiously enough, there was no citation in the notice of stir of relief sought on a indigenous base ”.
Loubser said the order Magudumana had sought from the court, as set out in her notice of stir, was to declare her arrest and transportation to SA unlawful. Also, her case was directed at the conduct of the police and not the department of home affairs.

“ Only in her replying affidavit did the aspirant contend that the repatriation disguised as a expatriation is inconsistent with the constitution. Despite this, the notice of stir wasn’t amended, ” said Loubser.
He appertained to former judgments of the Supreme Court of Appeal( SCA) and the indigenous Court, which said that where a protestation of indigenous invalidity was sought an aspirant must “ duly and specifically ” place the issue before the court.
“ The question of whether a person can waive a abecedarian indigenous right thus falls down, ” Loubser said, pertaining to the argument by Magudumana’s attorneys that his judgment raised a new question of law whether a person can assent to a breach of their indigenous rights by the state.

“ The data of the matter don’t pave the way for similar relief, ” Loubser said

He also rejected Magudumana’s argument that any concurrence to her junking from Tanzania had to be in jotting and unambiguous for it to be legal.
Her attorneys had appertained to a judgment from the SCA about what was needed for proper concurrence when it came to an repatriation and another high court judgment that a person can not assent to unconstitutional conduct by the state. They argued these judgments disaccorded with Loubser’s and were a good reason to grant leave to appeal.

Loubser said the government had no way claimed she was subscribing to being extradited. All the government claimed was that she had said she wanted to return home to her children.
The Free State High Court has refused Dr Nandipha Magudumana leave to appeal after chancing that SA felonious courts retain felonious governance over her.

Magudumana is the alleged main abettor of condemned killer and robber con Thabo Bester who escaped from the Mangaung Correctional Centre last time.

In June judge Phillip Loubser set up that though Magudumana’s junking to SA from Tanzania was a “ disguised repatriation ”, which was unconstitutional, she had acceded to her return. Her concurrence meant SA’s felonious courts retained governance over her.

Loubser said an appeal had no reasonable prospects of success and there were no other compelling reasons to grant leave to appeal.

The judge said Magudumana’s counsel had argued his order was wrong because he didn’t declare the disguised repatriation to be unconstitutional. But he said “ curiously enough, there was no citation in the notice of stir of relief sought on a indigenous base ”.

Loubser said the order Magudumana had sought from the court, as set out in her notice of stir, was to declare her arrest and transportation to SA unlawful. Also, her case was directed at the conduct of the police and not the department of home affairs.

“ Only in her replying affidavit did the aspirant contend that the repatriation disguised as a expatriation is inconsistent with the constitution. Despite this, the notice of stir wasn’t amended, ” said Loubser.

He appertained to former judgments of the Supreme Court of Appeal( SCA) and the indigenous Court, which said that where a protestation of indigenous invalidity was sought an aspirant must “ duly and specifically ” place the issue before the court.

“ The question of whether a person can waive a abecedarian indigenous right thus falls down, ” Loubser said, pertaining to the argument by Magudumana’s attorneys that his judgment raised a new question of law whether a person can assent to a breach of their indigenous rights by the state.

“ The data of the matter don’t pave the way for similar relief, ” Loubser said

He also rejected Magudumana’s argument that any concurrence to her junking from Tanzania had to be in jotting and unambiguous for it to be legal.

Her attorneys had appertained to a judgment from the SCA about what was needed for proper concurrence when it came to an repatriation and another high court judgment that a person can not assent to unconstitutional conduct by the state. They argued these judgments disaccorded with Loubser’s and were a good reason to grant leave to appeal.

Loubser said the government had noway claimed she was subscribing to being extradited. All the government claimed was that she had said she wanted to return home to her children.

“ That was the true nature of her concurrence, ” said the judge.

The cases appertained to by Magudumana’s attorneys were thus distinguishable from the data in this case, he said. Then, there were other judgments, binding on him, which said if someone acceded to their return to SA, the country’s felonious courts would retain governance. One similar judgment specifically said such a return didn’t transgress any abecedarian rights, Loubser said.
“ I’m thus not converted that another court would reach a different decision or that there are other compelling reasons why the matter should do on appeal, ” the judge said.

Magudumana may still supplicate the SCA to appeal.