Legal Aid South Africa

REMINDER: You do not pay for legal aid. Legal Aid SA's services are tax-payer funded. We are mandated to provide legal representation (in specified matters) and legal advice, at no cost. If you are asked to pay for legal aid through any form of communication - an SMS or WhatsApp, phone call, email or a consultation - please report this to our independent and toll-free Fraud and Ethics Hotline: 0800 153 728.

Incredible! The #SCA has set aside the commercial approval of a drought-tolerant genetically modified variety of maize by #Monsanto, now Bayer. Well done African Centre for Biodiversity and Legal Aid South Africa. 'This is the first judicial decision concerning #GMO decision-making in South Africa and “as such is precedent-setting”, the ACB said.

It's #casetalkTuesday! Today we applaud the Legal Aid SA Bellville Local Office, and a matter handled by Civil Legal Practitioner Janine Pretorius. BACKGROUND - Legal Aid SA is on record for 2 minor children aged 9 and 6 years old, by appointment of the Children's Court. - Their mother is deceased and they were removed from their father’s care in September 2021 in terms of section 152(1) of the Children's Act 38 of 2005, because they lived in or were exposed to circumstances which may seriously harm their physical, mental or social well-being. They were placed in the temporary safe care of their maternal grandparents. - The Court confirmed the removal and ordered an investigation into whether the children are in need of care and protection. - The father was uncooperative with the investigation. He was aggressive and adamant that the children must be placed back in his care. WHAT HAPPENED IN COURT? - Janine found that the father remained uncooperative with the investigation into the best interest of the children. - She consulted extensively with the children and supervised a contact visit the children had with their father. Janine found that the children expressed the view, both verbally and through body language, that they do not want to live with him or sleep over by him. They just want day visits. - Janine argued that although the children are young, their views remain important as expressed in the various ways in which they engaged with their father. She argued that the children should be placed in the foster care of their maternal grandparents to provide stability, that contact with the father should continue and that the children go for therapy. OUTCOME The Court accepted the recommendation and the children were placed in the foster care of their maternal grandparents for 2 years with various orders regarding contact and therapy. In this matter, Janine enforced the rights of the voice of the child in proceedings about them by ensuring that the Court not only heard the wishes of the children as verbally expressed but also as expressed through their behaviour and actions. Proudly #legalaidsa

Legal Aid SA is hiring! We are seeking to fill these vacancies: National Office – Procurement Officer National Office – Paralegal – Client Call Centre (Sign Language) National Office – Forensic Auditor National Office – Assistant Internal Auditor For more information on the requirements and closing date for each position, and to apply, visit our website: https://lnkd.in/dDtBBxA #legal #hiring #vacancies

#goodnewsFriday The Legal Aid SA Bellville Local Office visited Mandela Peace Park in Delft yesterday, sharing information on Legal Aid SA and spreading awareness on legal rights! Proudly #legalaidsa

It's #casetalkTuesday! Today we applaud the Legal Aid SA Louis Trichardt Local Office, and a matter handled by Civil Supervisory Legal Practitioner Shonisani Nechepete. BACKGROUND - Our client approached the Legal Aid SA Louis Trichardt Local Office seeking assistance to obtain a court order granting him primary care and residence of his biological child. Alternatively and at the very least, he wished for access to and contact with the child. - Our client, a married man, had a child out of wedlock. Unfortunately, the child's biological mother passed away in November 2018. Our client raised the child from birth and the child was using our client's surname. - The child's uncle later changed the surname to her mother's surname without our client's knowledge and consent. - During the child's biological mother's lifetime, she deposed to an affidavit stating that she gave our client consent to reside with the child. - The child's uncle requested our client to allow the child to visit him during school holidays and the mother passed away while the child was still at the uncle's homestead. - Our client requested the uncle to return the child after the funeral, but he refused. Our client was denied contact with the child. - He approached the Office of the Family Advocate to mediate, however, this failed. WHAT HAPPENED IN COURT? - When Shonisani inherited the matter from a private attorney, an application had already been lodged at the Polokwane High Court wherein our client prayed for the return of the minor child. - The uncle opposed the application and raised a point in limine (at the beginning) of a lack of locus standi (the right or capacity to bring an action or to appear in a court). - He alleged that our client is not the child's biological father. - Shonisani brought an application to the court to file supplementary affidavits to include the mother's affidavit confirming that our client is the minor child's biological father and raised the child since birth. - She further requested the Family Advocate to institute investigations. - The Office of the Family Advocate requested the uncle submit the child for paternity tests, however, he refused to do so. - To prioritise the finalisation of the matter, Shonisani wrote a letter to the Judge President requesting that since the matter concerns a child, it should be allocated a nearer date so it can be heard much sooner. - The Judge President agreed and declared the matter a preferential matter and allocated a nearer date. OUTCOME The court was persuaded by Shonisani's arguments that our client is the biological father of the child and ordered the Respondent to return the child to our client immediately. The child is now placed under the primary care of our client. Shonisani's proactive approach ensured that the child's time away from her father was not prolonged, avoiding alienation. Proudly #legalaidsa

It's #casetalkTuesday! Today we applaud the Legal Aid SA Newcastle Local Office, and a matter handled by Regional Court Legal Practitioner Lindokuhle Mpangase. BACKGROUND - Our client was charged with 1 count of murder. - The allegations were that on 10 September 2022, he killed the deceased by stabbing him. - The State further alleged that section 51(2) of Act 105 of 1997 - the Criminal Law Amendment Act - was applicable. - The brief facts are that the accused had a tenant who was a friend of the deceased. There was an issue regarding rent that was not paid and the deceased got involved in that argument. It appears that the argument was resolved and later that day the deceased saw the accused at the bottle store and confronted him about the earlier incident. A fight broke out between them and the accused stabbed the deceased to death. There was no eye witness in the matter except the friend of the deceased who testified that he was alerted that the accused and deceased were fighting. - When the friend came out of the tavern he saw both the accused and the deceased injured. - There were no allegations that the offence was planned or premeditated. WHAT HAPPENED IN COURT? - The State led evidence in the form of video footage depicting the fight. The challenge that the State had was that the video footage clearly showed the deceased being an aggressor and did not show the place where the fatal stabbing took place. - The other witnesses called by the State were 2 Police Officers who arrested the accused at the hospital. They admitted that he was injured but downplayed the extent of his injuries as minor. - The doctor who conducted a post-mortem examination on the body of the deceased conceded that some of the injuries he found could not only be analysed as defensive but as offensive as well. - The State Prosecutor tried to argue that our client had the knife with him because he anticipated an altercation between his tenant and/or the deceased, but we asked the court to find no merit in that argument. - If that was the State's argument, they should have charged the accused in terms of section 51(1) instead of section 51(2) of Act 105 of 1997. - Lindokuhle submitted that the assertion that the offence was planned or pre-meditated should be dismissed, arguing that the accused should be acquitted as the State's case should be rejected. OUTCOME After the argument/address on merits, our client was found not guilty. The court accepted that our client was acting in self-defence. Lindokuhle ensured that the rights enshrined in the Constitution were made real for our client. Proudly #legalaidsa

#goodnewsFriday Hear more from Legal Aid SA Board member Mr Nkhangweni Rambau (MIT, MBL, EDP, DBL Candidate) about today's Career Day at Tshinange Secondary School in Masakona Village! Proudly #legalaidsa

#goodnewsFriday Today, the Legal Aid SA Limpopo/Mpumalanga Provincial Office and Louis Trichardt Local Office participated in a Career Day at Tshinange Secondary School in Masakona Village. Board member Mr Nkhangweni Rambau (MIT, MBL, EDP, DBL Candidate) (in the red blazer) was also in attendance and addressed the learners! Proudly #legalaidsa

Civil Legal Practitioner Thabo Olyn from the Legal Aid SA Tembisa Local Office updates us on National #WillsWeek2024 and reminds us of the importance of having a will. Here at the Rabasotho Community Centre in Tembisa, over 300 wills have been drafted by all the stakeholders present today - so far! Proudly #legalaidsa