africa.lawBeta
SearchAsk AICollectionsJudgesCompareMemo
africa.law

Free access to African legal information. Legislation, case law, and regulatory documents from across the continent.

Resources

  • Legislation
  • Gazettes
  • Jurisdictions

Developers

  • API Documentation
  • Bulk Downloads
  • Data Sources
  • GitHub

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy

Jurisdictions

  • Ghana
  • Kenya
  • Nigeria
  • South Africa
  • Tanzania
  • Uganda

© 2026 africa.law by Bhala. Open legal information for Africa.

Aggregating legal information from official government publications and public legal databases across the continent.

Back to search
Case Law[2011] NAHC 274Namibia

S v Kaaronda (CRIMINAL 70 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 274 (21 September 2011)

High Court of Namibia

Judgment

# S v Kaaronda (CRIMINAL 70 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 274 (21 September 2011) [ __](https://api.whatsapp.com/send?text=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21) [ __](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21) [ __](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21) [ __](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21) [ __](mailto:?subject=Take a look at this document from NamibLII: S v Kaaronda \(CRIMINAL 70 of 2011\) …&body=https://namiblii.org/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21) [ Download RTF (1.6 MB) ](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21/source) Toggle dropdown * [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21/source.pdf) Report a problem __ * Share * [ Download RTF (1.6 MB) ](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21/source) * [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21/source.pdf) * * * * * Report a problem __ ##### S v Kaaronda (CRIMINAL 70 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 274 (21 September 2011) Copy citation * __Document detail * __Related documents * __Citations 1 / - Citation S v Kaaronda (CRIMINAL 70 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 274 (21 September 2011) Copy Media Neutral Citation [2011] NAHC 274 Copy Court [High Court](/judgments/NAHC/) Case number CRIMINAL 70 of 2011 Judges [Siboleka J](/judgments/all/?judges=Siboleka%20J), [Parker J](/judgments/all/?judges=Parker%20J) Judgment date 21 September 2011 Language English Other documents [Download PDF](/akn/na/judgment/nahc/2011/274/eng@2011-09-21/attachment/s-v-kaaronda-2011-nahc-274-21-september-2011.pdf) (91.3 KB) * * * Skip to document content **CASE NO.: CR 70/2011** “ _Not Reportable”_ **IN THE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA** In the matter between: **THE STATE** **vs** **RUDOLF KAARONDA** _(HIGH COURT REVIEW CASE NO.: 922/2011)_ _**CORAM**_**: PARKER, J** _et_**, SIBOLEKA, J** Delivered on: 2011 September 21 _________________________________________________________________ **REVIEW JUDGMENT** _________________________________________________________________ _**PARKER, J**_ [1] This matter has been referred to me by way of special review in terms of s 304 of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977 ([Act No. 51 of 1977](/akn/na/act/1977/51)) (‘CPA’). The accused was arraigned in the magistrates’ court, Okakarara, on assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The trial commenced and proceeded before Magistrate Ngwanga whose fixed-term contract of employment was not extended on its expiration, and so she returned to her home country, Zimbabwe. [2] In such a situation, it has been said (see _S v Scheepers_ 2009 (2) SACR 58 at 61g-h per Willis J) that the failure of a lower court to apply for the setting aside of proceedings and the commencement of a trial _de novo_ , as a result of the unavailability of the magistrate who began hearing evidence in the matter, will not necessarily result in a finding that an accused was subsequently wrongly convicted, if a trial _de novo_ does, in fact, take place without the prior sanction of the High Court. Nevertheless, it would certainly be desirable and good practice for an application to be made to the High Court, by way of special review, for the setting aside of previous proceedings and the commencement of a trial _de novo_. Rather than take the risk of injustice and unnecessary expense and inconvenience for the State and the accused, it is, by far, preferable to approach the High Court for a special review: the commencement of a trial _de novo_ is not merely an administrative matter. [3] I respectfully accept the point made by Willis J as a correct statement of law and so I adopt it. Having done so I make the following order: 1. The trial proceedings before the magistrate, Ms Ngwanga, in this matter are set aside. 2. The trial may commence _de novo_ before another magistrate at the discretion of the Prosecutor General. **______________________** **PARKER, J** _**I agree.**_ **_______________________** **SIBOLEKA, J** #### __Related documents ▲ To the top >

Similar Cases

S v Kadimba and Another (CRIMINAL 72 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 243 (12 August 2011)
[2011] NAHC 243High Court of Namibia89% similar
S v Kauari and Another (CRIMINAL 66 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 270 (21 September 2011)
[2011] NAHC 270High Court of Namibia88% similar
S v Kakutheya and Another (CRIMINAL 56 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 207 (15 July 2011)
[2011] NAHC 207High Court of Namibia88% similar
S v Kandjii (CRIMINAL 69 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 276 (21 September 2011)
[2011] NAHC 276High Court of Namibia87% similar
S v Haraseb and Another (CRIMINAL 85 of 2011) [2011] NAHC 275 (21 September 2011)
[2011] NAHC 275High Court of Namibia86% similar

Discussion