Suliman Carrim granted R100k bail in Madlanga Commission case
The court found his missed appearances concerning but said the risks could be managed with strict conditions, including his return travel booking and verified address.
A court has granted Suliman Carrim bail of R100,000 in the Madlanga Commission case, finding that the risks it identified can be managed through strict conditions rather than continued detention.
The ruling, reported by eNCA (YouTube), weighed the evidence of the applicant and the investigating officer alongside submissions from the legal representatives on both sides. The court said it had given particular weight to Carrim’s previous failures to attend proceedings before the Madlanga Commission, and to his evidence that his future attendance at court would depend on his medical condition and the advice of his treating medical practitioner.
The court regarded those circumstances as material and said they raised a legitimate concern about whether he would attend and comply with bail conditions in future. It also considered the likelihood of non-compliance with bail conditions under section 68C, and said the evidence had to be assessed cumulatively with his previous non-attendance and the medical explanations advanced, rather than each circumstance being considered in isolation.
But the court said his evidence had to be considered in its entirety. It noted that he did not expressly state he would disregard an order of the court, and that he had indicated his medical practitioner would make submissions on his condition through the appropriate channels. On that basis the court was not persuaded that his evidence established a deliberate intention to evade criminal proceedings.
The court also weighed his established ties to South Africa, his verified residential address, confirmation of his return travel booking, the nature of the offence charged, and what it described as the absence of persuasive evidence supporting the remaining grounds under section 64.
It stressed that his previous non-attendance before the commission, while concerning, could not be used to determine his guilt in the present proceedings through a bail application.
Having weighed the interests of justice against his right to personal freedom and the prejudice likely to arise from continued detention, the court found that the identified risks could be sufficiently addressed through appropriate bail conditions. It granted bail subject to stringent continued conditions designed to secure his attendance and compliance with the criminal proceedings, and was moving on to set those conditions when the broadcast extract ends.
The specific bail conditions were not set out in the material available.
