- The High Court dismissed the appeal against both conviction and sentence in full.
- The court found overwhelming evidence that the officers stole cocaine exhibits and tampered with evidence.
- The 13-year effective sentence was confirmed as appropriate given the seriousness of the offences.
The High Court in Johannesburg has confirmed that two police officers who interfered with a drug seizure at OR Tambo International Airport will serve lengthy prison terms, after dismissing their appeal against both conviction and sentence.
The case turned on whether officers entrusted with enforcing the law instead stole cocaine from a suspect and attempted to conceal their misconduct.
Acting Judge Matodzi Nemavhidi, with Judge Mandlenkosi Motha concurring, found that the State had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Raisibe Melda Ndukula and Faith Makhosazana Mtambo unlawfully removed part of a cocaine seizure and interfered with the integrity of the evidence. The court upheld both their convictions and the effective 13-year sentence imposed by the Regional Court in Kempton Park.
Arrest and seizure at OR Tambo
The case began on 8 March 2013 when Lebogang Paulinah Tshabalala arrived at OR Tambo International Airport from São Paulo, Brazil. She was stopped by SARS Customs officials, Pretty Dlamini and Dieketseng Beauty Motepe and taken to a private search room.
During the search, officials discovered cocaine concealed on her body using a specially designed belt strapped around her torso. The belt contained five compartments filled with compressed cocaine. Two smaller packets were also found hidden between her breasts.
The officials photographed Tshabalala and the drugs using their personal cellphones. These images showed all five compartments filled and both concealed packets clearly visible, creating a contemporaneous record of the full quantity of drugs at the time of discovery.
Tshabalala and the drugs were then handed over to members of the South African Police Service stationed at the airport’s Organised Crime Unit, transferring the evidence into police custody.
Parties and competing versions
Ndukula and Mtambo, both SAPS officers, were responsible for processing the case after the handover. Tshabalala later entered into a plea agreement and testified as a State witness.
She told the court that once at the SAPS offices, the officers removed some of the cocaine from the belt, placed it into a black laptop bag, and arranged for it to be taken out of the office. She said she was promised assistance with bail in return.
The officers denied all wrongdoing. They claimed they only saw the drugs later at the SAPS offices and denied removing any portion of the cocaine, the existence of a laptop bag, and any agreement with Tshabalala.
Court finds strong corroboration
Judge Nemavhidi approached Tshabalala’s evidence with caution, recognising that she was both a single witness and an accomplice. The court found, however, that her version was supported by compelling objective evidence.
The most significant evidence came from the photographs. The images taken by customs officials showed a larger quantity of cocaine than what was later photographed and officially recorded by SAPS. The judgment records, “This objective, contemporaneous visual record irrefutably establishes that the quantity of drugs present at the search room was greater than the quantity later photographed and booked into evidence.”
The structure of the body belt confirmed that it had five compartments, consistent with the original discovery and inconsistent with the reduced quantity later recorded.
The court also found irregularities in how the evidence was handled. Ndukula removed the drugs from their original packaging and crushed them before resealing them. The court rejected her explanation that this was standard procedure, finding no evidence to support it.
A discrepancy in the recorded weight of the drugs further undermined the appellants’ version, and the court found the explanation for the difference unconvincing.
Appellants’ version rejected
The court found the appellants’ version to be improbable when considered against the full body of evidence. Judge Nemavhidi emphasised the need to evaluate the evidence as a whole, stating, “One must guard against a tendency to focus too intently upon the separate and individual parts of what is, after all, a mosaic of proof.”
The court concluded that there was no reasonable possibility that the appellants’ version could be true. It also found that Mtambo’s conduct demonstrated active participation, supporting a finding of common purpose.
Arguments about missing CCTV footage and cellphone records were rejected, with the court holding that the available evidence was sufficient.
Sentence upheld
On sentence, the court found no misdirection and held that the 13-year effective imprisonment was appropriate.
Judge Nemavhidi stressed the seriousness of the offences, particularly because they were committed by police officers. The judgment states, “When those entrusted with the enforcement of the law become its violators, public confidence in the justice system is eroded.”
The court found that the offences involved not only drug possession but also the theft of exhibits and interference with the justice system. These factors outweighed the personal circumstances of the appellants, who were first offenders and long-serving SAPS members.
Appeal dismissed
The High Court confirmed both the convictions and the sentences, finding that the evidence against the appellants was overwhelming and that the trial court had committed no material misdirection.
The appeal was dismissed in full, and the 13-year sentence remains in place.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
