Ramesa Johannes Rathebe is a free man after the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein upheld his appeal against 11 counts of rape.
This judgment stemmed from a prior case in which his co-accused, identified only as Sekola, was discharged of similar charges earlier in February 2024, sparking serious questions about Rathebe’s convictions. Rathebe was serving 20 years’ imprisonment but had been released on warning pending the appeal.
This appeal was acknowledged as exceptional, taking place without an oral hearing by mutual consent under Section 19(a) of the Superior Courts Act 10 of 2013. At the heart of the judgment was the issue of whether Rathebe should also be acquitted of all charges following the earlier successful appeal by his co-accused.
Rathebe and his co-accused faced 11 counts of rape of one complainant. Both unsuccessfully appealed all the convictions and sentences before the Gauteng Division of the High Court, Pretoria. However, on appeal before the Supreme Court, Sekoala was found not guilty and discharged on all counts.
Trial court’s approach and errors
In the ruling, the Supreme Court criticised the trial court’s approach, noting that the complainant’s evidence was considered in isolation. The trial court failed to engage with the strengths and weaknesses of both the State’s case and the accused’s version, leading to a material misdirection. The Supreme Court emphasised that fundamental principles of criminal law dictate that if there is a reasonable possibility that an accused’s version is true, they must be acquitted.
“The complainant’s evidence that she was raped by both Sekoala and Rathebe must be considered along with the explanation given by both accused… Since the holding down of the hands while being raped was not the only reasonable inference to be drawn from the bruises on the arms, the trial court materially misdirected itself,” the Supreme Court found.
Its analysis also revealed that key elements of the medical evidence, particularly regarding the bruises found on the complainant’s arms, were not adequately tested. The injuries could have resulted from aggressive manhandling rather than the alleged rape, but this possibility was not explored during trial proceedings.
The importance of corroborative testimony in sexual assault cases
In cases involving sexual violence, the presence of corroborative testimony plays a critical role in establishing credibility and ensuring fair adjudication. The Supreme Court underscored that Section 208 of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 allows for conviction based on a single witness, but only if their testimony meets stringent evidentiary scrutiny.
The Supreme Court observed that while the complainant’s account implicated both men, Rathebe’s testimony provided a detailed, exculpatory version of events that aligned with other witness statements. The failure of the lower courts to properly weigh these contradictions led to a flawed conviction.
Implications for legal practice and procedural integrity
With the appeal upheld, the judgment of the High Court has been set aside, acquitting Rathebe on all charges.
#Conviction
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel
