WILDLEX

This is an appeal against a sentence. The appellant was charged with two counts:
1. Failing to declare the possession of 12 rhinoceros horns, contravening section 15(15)(b) read with section 1, 81, 87(1), and 95 of the Customs and Exice Act, No. 91 of 1964.

This is an application for leave to appeal against the sentence.

From December 2016 to September 2017, Sha W. contacted Li, and purchased 7 wildlife products including 3 piece of ivory products (a total of 114.49 grams and a value of RMB 4,770.45 yuan) from Li. Five of them were sold in the Wenjia booth at the "Jiaomen Jade Stone" in Zhangjiakou operated by Yaru L.

In early September 2016, the defendant Xiao knew that the wild birds illegally hunted by others, and he still purchased 1365 yellow-browed buntings. Later he raised the purchased wild birds in his yard to sell for profit.

Since 2010, Xinbao W. had illegally purchased, processed and sold ivory products for profit. After the incident, the public security organ seized a large amount of ivory products, ivory granules, etc. totaling 3.4 kg in Xinbao W.'s home.

From June 2014 to April 22, 2015, Yang Y. successively hired Jipeng Z. to process and make ivory jewellery in a bungalow. Yang Y. published pictures of ivory products by WeChat, contacted buyers for sales. Later, 10.945 kilograms of ivory products were seized in the studio, which were valued at RMB 456,045.

In August 2017, the defendant Zhu knew that the wild birds illegally hunted by others, and he still purchased 15,642 wild birds, including yellow-browed buntings, yellow-breasted buntings, common rosefinches, chestnut buntings. Later he raised the purchased wild birds in his rent house to sell for profit.

In September 2016, the defendant Du knew that the wild birds illegally were hunted by others, and he still purchased the birds many times. Among these, there were 4275 yellow-browed buntings and 15 common rosefinches. Later he raised the purchased wild birds in his yard to sell for profit.

The court considered an appeal on the basis that the magistrate erred in denying the accused bail and that the magistrate erred in finding that the accused may abscond and fail to attend trial due to his ability to enter and leave the Republic without going through a border.

The matter is an application for leave to appeal a judgement that was given in the a judgment of the Northern Cape High Court for contravening certain sections of the Nature and Environmental Conservation Ordinance 19 of 1974 which prohibit the harbouring of certain animals without a permit.