The KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) High Court in Durban has dismissed an application by 12 accused persons seeking to have a R37 million corruption case struck off the roll, stemming from the alleged misappropriation of public funds at the state-owned entity Mhlathuze Water.
The case involves accusations of fraud, theft, money laundering, extortion, corruption, and conspiracy to commit robbery linked to legal service tenders at the water utility, which is based in Richards Bay.
The suspects include former Mhlathuze Water CEO Mthokozisi Pius Duze (accused one); former CFO Babongile Mnyandu (accused two); former board deputy chairperson Silas Zwelakhe Hlophe (accused three); law firm Mhlanga Incorporated and its director, Sithembelo Ralph Mhlanga (accused four and five); Siyanda Basil Ngongoma (accused six); Thabiso Wesley Khumalo (accused seven); and Andile Mcineka (accused eight).
ALSO READ: Judiciary in the dock as corruption cases engulf senior judges
Also facing charges are NCD Investments (accused nine); Nofezile Charon Mhlanga (accused 10); Nonhlanhla Omic Mkhize (accused 11); and Siphiwe Moses Mabaso (accused 12).
The accused had applied in terms of section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act, seeking to halt proceedings and prevent prosecution without written authorisation from KZN’s Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), citing unreasonable delays and prejudice arising from prolonged legal proceedings.
The state opposed the application, arguing that delays were justified by the case’s complexity and the need for further investigation.
Mhlathuze Water corruption case background
The case was plagued by a convoluted legal process stretching over three years.
Duze, Mnyandu, Mhlanga, and Khumalo were first arrested on 29 August 2022, with subsequent arrests of other accused continuing through 2023.
When the initial four arrested appeared in court the following day, the investigating officer had stated that the investigation – which involved extensive document collection, analysis of digital devices, bank statements, and forensic evidence – was about 90% complete and that the state required a period of three months to finalise the matter.
However, the state requested further postponements.
A pre-trial conference was set down in the Durban High Court for July 2024, but the case was further adjourned to 7 November 2024 for the determination of trial readiness.
ALSO READ: NPA struggles with high-profile corruption cases
KZN High Court Judge President Thoba Portia Poyo-Dlwati set the trial dates from 23 February to 27 March 2026 and from 13 to 15 April 2026.
However, ongoing discovery by the state – including multiple terabytes of digital evidence encompassing hundreds of thousands of files – made the trial unfeasible on those dates.
A pre-trial video conference on 3 October 2025 revealed that all parties agreed the matter could not proceed until further discovery was completed.
While Judge Jacqueline Henriques postponed the case 26 November, the accused lodged their 342A application on 23 October.
342A application
The accused argued that they had been prejudiced by being subjected to stringent bail conditions for over three years and incurring high legal costs.
They claimed the state had misrepresented the readiness of the matter for trial and questioned the admissibility of certain affidavits submitted by the prosecution.
KZN Deputy DPP Bulelwa Vimbani-Shuma, on behalf of the state, countered that delays were partly caused by the defence’s requests for further particulars and representations, the need for mutual legal assistance internationally, the discovery of missing digital files, and the involvement of additional suspects.
The complexity of the case further justified the extended investigation.
KZN High Court judgment
In delivering judgment, Judge Mbuzeni Mathenjwa noted that both the state and defence have been occupied with numerous legal applications since the accused first appeared in 2022.
He added that the discovery of millions of pages of documents by the state demonstrated that the investigation required significant time.
“On a conspectus of the facts I am of the view that the state could have done better in expediting the matter and alleviate further delay in prosecuting of the matter.
“However, considering the complexity of the matter, the interlocutory applications, numerous representations to the state, numerous requests for further particulars, new arrests made and discovery of further information which required further investigation, I cannot find that the delay in prosecuting the matter was unreasonable,” the judgment reads.
Mathenjwa emphasised that proceeding with a trial before discovery was complete would prejudice the defence, while striking the case off the roll would further delay justice.
Consequently, the high court dismissed the application to strike the case from the roll and declared that the 2026 trial dates were no longer reserved.
The matter will be enrolled on the pre-trial roll.
NOW READ: ‘The real thugs are now coming out’: Mapisa-Nqakula denies being SA’s face of corruption
About the Author
