Click here to read the full judgment on Saflii

Introduction

[1]              This is an urgent application in terms of Rule 6 (12) (a) brought by the applicant in respect of a series of conduct to obtain relief in the form of declaratory relief of the unconstitutionality regarding the egregious infringements of her rights. More specifically the applicant seeks the following relief: 

1.      Dispensing with the normal provisions of the Rules and dealing with this application on the basis of urgency, in terms of Rule 6(12) (a) of the Rules, read with the relevant directives.

2.      Declaring that the decision of the third and fourth respondents to apply for the warrant of arrest of the applicant is unconstitutional, irrational and invalid.

3.      Declaring that the decision to issue the warrant of arrest of the applicant is unconstitutional, irrational and invalid.

4.      Declaring that the decision to execute the warrant of arrest by third and fourth respondents is unconstitutional, irrational, invalid and of no force or effect.

5.      Setting aside the decision to effect the arrest and/or to prosecute the applicant.

6.      Declaring the confiscation of the applicant’s information and communication   

technology equipment to be unlawful, unconstitutional and accordingly invalid.

7.      Ordering the respondents to restore all information unlawfully removed from ICT

equipment.

8.      Directing the third, fourth and fifth respondents to return the information which was

downloaded from electronic gadgets of the applicant by the third and fourth respondents, including the information contained in Disc 1 to Disc 6 referred to in these papers, forthwith.

9. Directing that the costs of this application on an attorney and own client scale are

    paid by those respondents who will deliver notice(s) to oppose. 

9.      Alternatively to paragraph 10 above: Directing that the third, fourth and fifth

respondents to pay the said costs, in their personal capacities.