Court clears way for Canadian’s extradition to US over drug charges after 10-year legal battle

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has won its appeal after the Western Cape High Court in Cape Town ruled that a Canadian businessman can be extradited to the United States (US) on drug-related conspiracy charges

The Western Cape Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) appealed an earlier decision that ruled against Daniel Louie’s extradition.

Louie had been investigated by US authorities due to the involvement of his company in the distribution of chemicals used in the manufacture of so-called “designer drugs”, including synthetic cannabis and substances marketed as “bath salts”.

Investigation, arrest, and US extradition request

From as early as February 2011, the US’s Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agency had been investigating the international trade in synthetic drugs.

The importation and distribution of bath salts and synthetic marijuana, which include synthetic cathinones and synthetic cannabinoids, respectively, are prohibited under the US Controlled Substances Act.

Louie had relocated to Barbados in January 2012, where he established his company and more than a year later, in June 2013, the local police raided his premises following undercover purchases made by DEA agents.

The Canadian was subsequently arrested and charged in Barbados, but fled to South Africa.

He was arrested at Cape Town International Airport in March 2014 while en route to Barbados via London.

ALSO READ: US extradition of Magashule’s ex-PA Moroadi Cholota declared unlawful

The arrest came after the US’s January 2014 request to South Africa to provisionally arrest him.

He then appeared in the Bellville Magistrates’ Court the following day after his arrest on 6 March and was subsequently released on R100 000 bail on 31 March.

Extradition proceedings were initiated under the Extradition Act after the US submitted a formal application on 2 May 2014 via a diplomatic note.

The Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development issued the requisite notification shortly thereafter.

The extradition request was based on three alleged conspiracy charges between July 2012 and June 2013: conspiring to import buphedrone into the US, conspiring to possess and distribute the substance, and conspiring to launder the proceeds through a Panamanian account.

Delays and legal challenges

The extradition enquiry, however, stalled for several years due to Louie’s legal challenge to amendments to Schedule 7 of the Medicines and Related Substances Act.

After Louie abandoned his application in late 2017, the enquiry eventually resumed in May 2018.

But further delays followed after the Canadian challenged the admissibility of a statement by a US prosecutor, which was ultimately ruled admissible in February 2019.

The proceedings then came to a near standstill when the Magistrate Godwana ceased sitting at the Bellville Magistrates’ Court and declined to return.

Only after a special review in the Western Cape High Court was the magistrate directed to complete the enquiry in March 2021.

Evidence on dual criminality

Central to the extradition enquiry was whether Louie’s alleged conduct constituted an offence under both US and South African law, as required by the principle of dual criminality.

During the extradition proceedings, the state relied heavily on the expert testimony of Colonel Hendrik Johannes Jakobus Westraat, a senior forensic chemical expert within the police.

He testified that buphedrone is chemically related to cathinone, a substance listed under Schedule 7 of the Medicines and Related Substances Act.

Cathinone had been scheduled in 2008, and legislative amendments in 2012 extended Schedule 7 to include all homologues of listed substances.

In addition, mephedrone was listed under Schedule 7 in 2016.

On this basis, Westraat concluded that buphedrone was implicitly a Schedule 7 substance in South Africa at the relevant time.

Louie, however, relied on his own testimony and a 2012 legal opinion obtained in the US instead of calling an expert to give evidence.

The legal opinion had warned that, due to its structural similarity to cathinone, buphedrone carried legal risks and could attract criminal liability if laws or chemical classifications changed.

Discharge and appeal

At the conclusion of the enquiry, Godwana delivered an unwritten ruling on 1 December 2023 discharging Louie under section 2 of the Extradition Act.

This led to the DPP lodging an appeal in July 2024, arguing that the magistrate failed to properly assess whether there was sufficient evidence to warrant extradition, rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the appeal application heard in September this year, the DPP asked the Western Cape High Court to decide whether Godwana made a legal mistake by finding that buphedrone was not a dangerous or prohibited drug, even though it is chemically related to cathinone.

The DPP also argued that the magistrate was wrong to conclude that possessing and distributing buphedrone was not illegal, and that money made from selling buphedrone was not the proceeds of crime under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (POCA).

Western Cape High Court judgment

In their judgment on 19 December 2025, Judge Vincent Saldanha said it was undisputed that buphedrone was not specifically listed by name in the Medicines Act in 2014 when the enquiry began.

Saldanha criticised Godwana’s judgment, saying it was unclear and that he appeared to have asked the wrong legal questions when he discharged Louie.

The judge said the magistrate missed the key point: because buphedrone is a chemical relative of cathinone, it should also be treated as a prohibited substance under South African law.

He also noted that Godwana wrongly rejected Westraat’s evidence.

“It also appeared from the magistrate’s judgment that he had concluded that Colonel Westraat’s evidence was irrelevant and by implication, inadmissible,” the 19 December 2025 judgment reads.

Importantly, Louie did not present any expert evidence to challenge Westraat’s testimony.

Saldanha, therefore, found that the South African offences were substantially the same as the offences charged in the US.

This meant the requirement of dual criminality was met.

Canadian businessman granted bail

The judge expressed concern about the 10-year delay in finalising the case, saying it harmed the justice system and South Africa’s obligations under its extradition treaty with the US.

Saldanha ruled that it was fair for Louie to remain out on bail while the Minister of Justice decides on extradition.

As a result, the high court set aside the magistrate’s decision, found that Louie can be extradited to the US, and granted him R25 000 bail.

Louie must hand over his passport, report to the Gordon’s Bay police station every Friday, and remain in South Africa.

NOW READ: Ex-US attorney loses extradition appeal, 22 years after ‘fleeing US to evade tax crimes’