Danny Jordaan fails in bid to have fraud, theft case thrown out of court

In marathon proceedings at the Palm Ridge Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday, Danny Jordaan and his co-accused in a matter of fraud and theft within the South African Football Association (Safa) failed in their attempt to have their case struck off the court roll.

Jordaan, Safa’s chief of finance, Gronie Hluyo, and public relations company boss Trevor Neethling were back in court for the third time since their arrest on 13 November and were each granted bail of R20,000.

First blood — Arendse stays

The court heard two applications. The first was from that State, asking for the recusal of Jordaan and Hluyo’s advocate Norman Arendse from the matter. The State alleged Arendse was conflicted because he had represented Safa in previous legal matters. According to the State, Safa is one of the complainants in this matter.

Prosecutor Moagi Molebati argued that Arendse was employed to “protect the interests of Safa”, which he could not do if he continued to represent Jordaan and Hluyo.

Molebati said Arendse had recently represented Safa in a court application brought by Jordaan’s challengers, Ria Ledwaba and Solly Mohlabeng, in the soccer body’s 2022 elections.

Ledwaba and Mohlabeng were challenging the constitutionality and credibility of the elections which Jordaan won at a canter two years ago. Their bid was dismissed.

The State was dealt a blow in its efforts to have Arendse removed, with magistrate Sheron Soko-Rantao saying the court had no jurisdiction to force Arendse to step aside, and that the State could take the matter to a higher court if it wished to pursue it further.

The State declined this offer and accepted the ruling.

State strikes back

The second application was brought by the three accused. They wanted the matter scrapped from the court roll, citing two outstanding legal matters whose outcomes may sway this case in their favour.

Arendse asked the court to review the merits of the Hawks’ raid at Safa House in March, an action which he said was “unlawful and malicious”.

The matter is currently being heard at the Gauteng Division of the High Court; however, an outcome is not expected until well into 2025 — and even then, it may be appealed against, causing further delays in its finalisation.

The second court matter which Arendse cited involves an urgent interdict that Hluyo and Jordaan tried to bring before the courts to prevent their arrests. The Hawks arrested them before the matter could be heard in court.

Despite the urgency falling away due to their arrests, the pair are still waiting for the matter to be heard in court, in the hopes that their arrests will be cast aside.

Neethling, whose PR company Jordaan allegedly used to sanitise his public image (allegedly with Safa money) following rape allegations against him in 2017, joined Hluyo and the Safa president in the application to have the matter struck off the roll.

Neethling’s lawyer James Ndebele told the court that his client was a pawn in Safa’s factional battles.

Prosecutor Molebati said, “The applicants’ act of delving into the merits [of the case] at this stage is a clear tactic aimed at confusing the court as well as a tactic to circumvent the trial procedure.

“The applicants are challenged to allow the proper trial of the matter wherein they will have ample opportunity to test and disprove the State’s evidence.”

Jordaan, Hluyo and Neethling’s argument was based on section 342A of the Criminal Procedure Act.

It reads as follows: “A court before which criminal proceedings are pending shall investigate any delay in the completion of proceedings which appears to the court to be unreasonable and which could cause substantial prejudice to the prosecution, the accused or his/her legal adviser, the State or a witness.”

Magistrate Soko-Rantao agreed with the State.

“I have not identified the delay, taking into account that the matter started in November. So, there is no delay. On that basis, I’m saying that section 342A is premature in these proceedings and this court is dismissing the application.”

Continued support

Safa National Executive Committee (NEC) member Jack Maluleka told journalists that he and his colleagues in Safa stood by their president.

“I won’t labour much on this issue, because tomorrow it might be me. Allegations are allegations… If there is something [of substance], it has to be proven,” said Maluleka.

“I don’t recall the NEC discussing any kind of misconduct. It’s only in the courts. That’s why we are here to support Dr Jordaan.”

The matter was postponed until 7 February. DM