Feroz Khan co-accused could seek charges withdrawal as defence slams ‘delays’ in precious metals case

The alleged delays were undermining the accused's constitutional right to a fair and expeditious trial. One of the accused in the precious metals matter involving suspended Crime Intelligence deputy head Feroz Khan could seek the withdrawal of charges against him. The Kempton Park Magistrate’s Court heard on Wednesday, 2 September 2026, that representations could potentially be made to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) once the defence receives the outstanding documents. Khan, who was not in court for the second time, Gauteng Hawks head Ebrahim Kadwa and businessman Tariq Downes are facing charges that include corruption, defeating the ends of justice and contravening the Precious Metals Act. The three men were arrested on 10 May 2026 in connection with a 2021 incident at OR Tambo International Airport, where 75.9 grams of raw gold, valued at R62 836, were seized. They are currently out on R20 000 bail. Defence accuses state of delaying proceedings Proceedings on Wednesday became tense as defence lawyers criticised the state over what they described as continued delays in providing documents needed to prepare their clients’ cases. One of the legal representatives told the court that the delays were undermining the accused’s constitutional right to a fair and expeditious trial. “Section 35(3)(d) of the Constitution, as you are aware, of the Republic of South Africa guarantees every accused the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to have their trial begin and conclude without a reasonable dealing. “Your Worship, at this stage, the legal conundrum we face ourselves with, is with respect, that the state is the author of the situation we find ourselves in,” he argued. The lawyer said the state had previously undertaken to provide complete disclosure, including the case docket, charge sheet and list of witnesses. He also pointed to processes outside the criminal case, saying these were having an impact on the defence’s ability to prepare. “It all has a bearing on [the] same for us, having been able to approach witnesses in order to consult or get evidence to prepare for other matters, and our hands are being tied by the state in this regard. He stressed that the defence was prejudiced. “A list of state witnesses at the very least should have been made available and part of disclosure. “The state is not playing open cards. They haven’t come with clean hands, Your Worship, with respect. “We have been prejudiced by these delays. The court has been prejudiced by these delays. A charge should have been served as well.” Kadwa legal battle Downes’ legal representative contended that it was known that the state had applied for J50 arrest warrants to secure the accused’s arrest, which meant there was a prima facie case. “It can hardly be justifiable that the state is still looking for evidence at this point to complete its investigation. “Even if that investigation is not complete and the state finds it necessary to secure the information that’s contained in the accused number three’s phone, surely the bulk of the investigation has been done and that information can be available to us.” He said Downes was being placed in a difficult position because he was required to continue appearing in court while being unable to fully prepare his defence. According to the lawyer, the situation has been complicated by separate litigation between Kadwa and the state. Kadwa earlier this month indicated that he intended taking his legal battle to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). This follows the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg dismissing his application seeking an order compelling the police to stop accessing his cellphone and to return the seized device. Downes’ lawyer told the court that it remained unclear when that litigation would be finalised. “That process could take months if not years, and the situation then is that we would have to continuously appear in court with the state not being in a position to complete its investigation.” Representations to NPA The lawyer indicated that Downes could approach the offices of the Johannesburg Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Andy Mothibi, once the requested documents had been provided. He said such representations, which is a formal request allowing an accused person to ask the NPA to review the decision to charge them, could ultimately have consequences for the continuation of the prosecution. “The possible conclusion of those representations is that the state may not elect to proceed against accused number one or any other accused.” The defence asked the court to compel the state to provide the outstanding documents, arguing that the request was not unreasonable due to the amount of time that had passed since the accused first appeared in court. “Given the period of time that this investigation has been pending and the manner in which the accused were arrested and their attendance before court secured, I don’t believe it’s unreasonable as well for the accused’s rights to be pendulous and compromised in terms of making submissions to the DPP to have this matter dealt with.” The matter was postponed to 27 November 2026.