NPA Considers Appeal After Court Rules It Lacks Jurisdiction in Cholota Case

In a statement released on Tuesday, NPA spokesperson Advocate Mthunzi Mhaga confirmed that the prosecuting authority had taken note of the ruling and would be considering appeal options.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) is weighing its legal options after the Free State Division of the High Court in Bloemfontein ruled that it has no jurisdiction to prosecute Moroadi Cholota, one of the accused in the R255 million asbestos corruption case involving high-profile figures such as former Free State Premier Ace Magashule and businessman Edwin Sodi.

The judgment, handed down this week, upheld Cholota’s special plea challenging her extradition and the court’s jurisdiction to prosecute her. Cholota, who served as Magashule’s personal assistant at the time the controversial asbestos removal contract was awarded, had been extradited back to South Africa by the NPA after initially failing to appear in court alongside the other accused.

However, she contested the process, arguing that both the extradition procedures and the assumption of prosecutorial jurisdiction over her were flawed. The court agreed, delivering a potentially precedent-setting verdict that could have implications for future extradition cases and cross-border prosecutions.

NPA Response and Legal Strategy

In a statement released on Tuesday, NPA spokesperson Advocate Mthunzi Mhaga confirmed that the prosecuting authority had taken note of the ruling and would be considering appeal options.

“The NPA has noted the judgment…upholding Ms Cholota’s special plea of lack of jurisdiction. The NPA will specifically consider options to appeal, given the potential impact this may have on the case against Ms Cholota and on future extradition proceedings,” Mhaga said.

While the court ruling is a temporary setback for the prosecution of Cholota, the NPA emphasized that the main trial against Magashule, Sodi, and other co-accused will proceed as planned, with court proceedings set to resume on 4 June 2025.

“This judgment has no bearing on the other accused. Ms Cholota was charged as an accused, not as a state witness. We remain confident in the strength of our case,” Mhaga affirmed.

Background of the Asbestos Scandal

The R255 million asbestos tender scandal is one of the most notorious corruption cases to emerge from the Free State, centering on a government project meant to remove hazardous asbestos from low-cost housing.

Investigations revealed that a contract was awarded without proper tender procedures, and the work was either poorly executed or not completed at all. Millions of rands were allegedly funneled to politically connected individuals and companies, including those linked to Edwin Sodi.

The case has become a touchstone for anti-corruption efforts in South Africa, as it implicates prominent political figures and highlights systemic procurement irregularities within provincial governments.

Legal Turbulence in High-Profile Prosecutions

The ruling in the Cholota matter comes amid other high-profile legal battles involving the NPA, including the long-running corruption trial of former President Jacob Zuma and French arms manufacturer Thales.

In a parallel legal development, the KwaZulu-Natal Division of the High Court in Pietermaritzburg dismissed a permanent stay of prosecution application filed by Zuma and Thales. The pair are accused of involvement in a massive corruption scandal dating back to the 1999 Arms Deal, which allegedly involved bribes and unlawful contracts.

Mhaga welcomed the ruling, saying the decision validates the NPA’s position that the matter must be heard in court.

“The NPA feels vindicated by the dismissal as we held the view that the application had no merit, especially since the same court had previously ruled on the matter,” Mhaga stated.

“We hope that this paves the way for the resumption of the protracted trial, which has been marred by numerous interlocutory applications designed to delay the trial.”

Broader Implications and Institutional Confidence

Despite the mixed outcomes this week, the NPA maintains that its actions in both the Cholota and Zuma matters were informed by law and conducted ethically, based on the information available at the time.

The prosecuting authority is under increasing pressure to deliver results in complex corruption cases, many of which are tied to the broader investigation into state capture, as outlined by the Zondo Commission.

Legal analysts have noted that the Cholota judgment, if left unchallenged, may create procedural hurdles in future extraditions, especially when suspects are brought in under controversial or unclear legal frameworks.

However, the Zuma judgment provides a significant boost to the NPA’s efforts, potentially allowing one of South Africa’s most high-profile corruption trials to proceed without further delay.

Looking Ahead

As the Magashule trial resumes on 4 June and the Zuma/Thales trial edges closer to substantive proceedings, the NPA's dual responsibility to uphold justice and protect the integrity of legal processes will continue to come under intense public and judicial scrutiny.

The next few months will be pivotal in determining whether South Africa’s prosecutorial machinery can meet the demands of holding powerful figures accountable in the aftermath of state capture.