Key Takeaways:
- Mike Sandlana, the corruption-accused leader of a faction of the International Pentecostal Holiness Church, is awaiting judgment on his bail application.
- The state opposes his release on bail, citing new evidence and circumstances, including allegations that Sandlana exaggerated his medical condition to gain sympathy from the court.
- Sandlana is accused of bribing a high court judge, Portia Phahlane, to deliver a favorable judgment in a succession dispute involving the church.
- The state argues that Sandlana has a history of lying to the court and committing crimes while out on bail, and that his release would not be in the interest of justice.
Introduction to the Case
The bail application of Mike Sandlana, the corruption-accused leader of a faction of the International Pentecostal Holiness Church, has taken a dramatic turn. Sandlana is accused of bribing high court judge Portia Phahlane to deliver a favorable judgment in a succession dispute involving the church. The state has opposed his release on bail, presenting new evidence and circumstances that suggest Sandlana has attempted to deceive the court about his medical condition. The case has been ongoing, with Sandlana and his spokesperson, Vusi Ndala, being arrested in November, along with judge Phahlane and her son, Kagiso.
The State’s Opposition to Bail
The state’s opposition to Sandlana’s bail application is based on several grounds, including allegations that he has exaggerated his medical condition to gain sympathy from the court. The investigating officer, Ludi Rolf Schnelle, has submitted a supplementary affidavit that sheds light on new evidence and circumstances. According to Schnelle, Sandlana secured the biased support of an alleged family doctor, Aluwani Sabata, who is also a loyal church follower, to overstate his medical condition. The state argues that this is a clear sign of desperation by Sandlana to get out of jail, and that his medical conditions are not as serious as he claims.
Sandlana’s History of Deception
The state has also highlighted Sandlana’s history of deception, including his attempts to mislead the court about his identity and his role in various crimes. Sandlana has been accused of committing crimes while out on bail, and has provided different addresses and identities in his court applications. The state argues that this history of deception makes it unlikely that Sandlana will comply with the terms of his bail, and that his release would not be in the interest of justice. The state prosecutor, Willem van Zyl, has argued that Sandlana’s actions demonstrate a pattern of dishonesty and a disregard for the law.
The Defence’s Argument
The defence has argued that the investigating officer has gone out of his way to create suspicion without proper basis. Sandlana’s lawyer, Adv Christo Meiring, has argued that there is nothing sinister about Sandlana approaching the court with an urgent notice of motion for bail, given his genuine concerns about his health. Meiring has also argued that the state’s opposition to bail is based on speculation and conjecture, rather than concrete evidence. However, the state remains unconvinced, and the court will have to weigh the evidence and arguments presented by both sides before making a decision on Sandlana’s bail application.
Conclusion and Judgment
The judgment on Sandlana’s bail application is expected to be handed down next Monday. The court will have to consider the evidence and arguments presented by both sides, including the state’s allegations of deception and the defence’s arguments about Sandlana’s genuine concerns about his health. The outcome of the case will have significant implications for Sandlana and the International Pentecostal Holiness Church, and will be closely watched by the public and the media. Ultimately, the court’s decision will depend on its assessment of the evidence and the likelihood of Sandlana complying with the terms of his bail.