The hostility of an unhelpful King William’s Town magistrate, who refused to assist an unrepresented accused facing a negligent driving charge, has resulted in the conviction of the accused being set aside.
In setting aside the conviction and R2,000 fine dished out to Wildridge Peter Galt in the King William’s Town magistrate’s court, the Grahamstown high court affirmed both the right of an accused to be legally represented as well as their right to refuse it and represent themselves.
In a stern judgment the court emphasised there was an onus on a magistrate or judge to assist an accused who was representing him- or herself.
Galt had appealed against the conviction.
The state conceded the appeal on the basis that he had not received a fair trial because of the way he had been treated in court by the magistrate.
The magistrate was found to be hostile, intolerant, unhelpful and dismissive of Galt.
Judge Clive Plasket, with acting judge Ntsikelelo Mtshabe agreeing, found that the unnamed magistrate was “pointedly hostile” to Galt because he had opted to represent himself.
When Galt had faltered on issues of procedure he snapped at him that this was why he needed an attorney and that he was “stuck” and unable to understand what to do. He repeatedly and deliberately refused to assist Galt on any issue, saying that was not his job.
Plasket said the magistrate expressly disavowed his duty to assist the unrepresented Galt.
“In this respect he committed an irregularity that prejudiced (Galt) in the conduct of his defence and rendered the trial unfair.” He added that a criminal trial was not a game and the presiding officer was not a mere umpire.
“He or she is an administrator of justice, whose duty is not only to direct and control proceedings according to recognised rules of procedure but to see that justice is done.”..