Suliman Carrim objects to messages downloaded from phone as state calls him a flight risk

Carrim offered to accept a travel ban. Former North West ANC treasurer Suliman Carrim challenged the legality of a WhatsApp download from his seized phone in the Musina Magistrate’s Court on 9 November. Carrim appeared in the magistrate’s court after being arrested for his alleged involvement in the illegal transportation of two vehicles across the border. The state opposed his bail and called him a flight risk. The court postponed the matter to 16 November. Dispute over seized phone During the bail hearing, the court heard that the police took Carrim’s phone when they arrested him at OR Tambo International Airport on 15 October. The investigating officer later downloaded WhatsApp messages from it, according to the defence, which said it had never received copies. Carrim denied agreeing to the download. “I did not consent to the downloading of my phone. No search warrant authorising that download has been shown to me,” Carrim stated. He also said he would challenge the evidence. “I reserve my right to challenge how the information was obtained and presented,” he said. The state was expected to hand over the messages. State cites UAE residency and undisclosed properties The state’s case rested largely on him being a flight risk. Investigating officer Captain Jimmy Kubayi, of the Commission Recommendations Task Team, said Carrim failed to disclose eight properties and was paying off a R30 million bond that far exceeded his declared monthly income. Kubayi also pointed to Carrim’s UAE residency. “The applicant has residency in the UAE, which offers the right to reside there, a country which has shown some unwillingness to extradite suspects to the Republic of South Africa,” Kubayi argued. Carrim responded that some properties belonged to separate companies. “I did not claim that the properties named were an exhaustive list of every personal and company asset,” he stated. His lawyers added that his second wife’s rented home was not his. Bail condition and medical claims Kubayi said Carrim also failed to meet a Pretoria bail condition. It required arrangements for his next Madlanga commission appearance, and Carrim was granted R100 000 bail there on 28 October. “This does not work well for future compliance,” Kubayi claimed. The defence countered that the condition was aimed at his lawyers, who wrote to the commission within 48 hours. It also pointed to inpatient records to support his illness claims. Kubayi rejected those claims. “Not a single doctor’s letter has been presented to this court where it stated that the applicant was at any time unfit to attend court or the commission,” he said. Carrim denies vehicle plan The charges stem from two financed vehicles intercepted at the Beitbridge border post on 22 July, allegedly bound for Malawi. Authorities arrested two co-accused that day, and added Carrim to the case on 22 October. Carrim denied any role of knowing, aiding or authorising the use or transportation of the vehicles. “I knew nothing of an alleged arrangement with Mr Mpatso Lunga or the promised payment of R4 000. At the time I was a patient in Cape Town,” he said. His lawyers said ABSA had approved an earlier trip to Malawi and later released the vehicles to Ziggy Investments CC. They also claimed the state stopped accepting guilty pleas from the co-accused once Carrim joined the case. Turning to the money laundering charge, his counsel questioned the state’s reasoning. “The state must explain how these already financed vehicles became proceeds of unlawful activity,” counsel submitted. Defence offers strict conditions Carrim’s lawyers argued that he could not flee because the investigating officer held his passport. They cited rulings which found foreign ties alone did not prove flight risk. “The applicant has a verified home address. The court can require him to live there, report to the police, attend every hearing and remain in South Africa,” his counsel argued. Carrim offered to accept a travel ban. “I am willing to accept a condition prohibiting all international travel without prior permission from the competent court,” he said. The defence undertook to submit written heads of argument and the Madlanga commission correspondence before the next hearing.