WILDLEX

In 1995 a wildlife officer received information that the appellants have been engaged in illegally trafficking in white-tailed deer, deer and elk antlers, and moose. As a result of the resulting investigation the appellants were charged with a variety of offences contrary to The Wildlife Act, S.S.

Mr. Sawicki plead guilty under The Wildlife Act, 1998, for trafficking in wildlife and possession of wildlife for the purpose of trafficking, contrary to s.44(a) and s.44(b). He was sentenced to 15 months to be served in the community (a conditional sentence).

This is a case of appeal. The respondent was accused on three charges listed above. The question was, whether the permits the respondent (at that time: the accused) carried were technically valid for the actions he committed.

This is an appeal by the appellant against his conviction and sentence by the Regional Court magistrate, Upington, on charges of contravention of sections 44(1)(b)(i) and 46 of the Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974.

The court held that in this matter, it was common cause that a South African Court had jurisdiction to decide ownership of the Sable based on the cession agreement. The court found that the cession agreement had been signed by the attorney, acting under the authority of the first respondent.

The appellant was found guilty in the Upington Magistrate’s Court, and appealed his conviction and sentence to the Northern Cape High Court where the conviction and sentence on the first count was set aside, and the conviction on the second count confirmed but the sentence was amended.