Syed Mohiudeen, who is co-accused with Mthuthuzeli Swartz, was present in court. The case revolves around allegations that Swartz, who was PRASA’s Western Cape regional director, and Mohiudeen, through his company Spanish Ice, stole a disused Transnet railway line between Sterkstroom and Maclear. The theft was reported to the Elliot police station in the Eastern Cape in February 2013, but it took six years before Swartz was arrested in January 2019 and Mohiudeen in February 2019.
The pair is accused of taking a R1.5-million deposit from Cape Town cousins Adrian and Cedric Samuels for the sale of the railway line, which was later removed for its steel value. During the time the case was under investigation, Swartz was appointed as PRASA’s acting CEO for three months in 2018. However, his tenure ended when the PRASA board removed him after insurers refused to provide liability cover.
The criminal case, which has faced several delays, reached a halt after Mohiudeen filed a review application to contest the dismissal of his request for further details about the charges against him by Magistrate Nolitha Bara. He is also challenging the R58 million in damages claimed by Transnet as a result of the stolen railway line.
Mohiudeen filed his heads of argument on June 3, 2024, with assistance from his niece in London. However, on Thursday, he asked for a postponement of the proceedings so he could secure legal representation. He explained that he had only received the state’s responding papers on the morning of the hearing and had changed lawyers multiple times since the start of his case, including an unsuccessful attempt to obtain assistance from Legal Aid.
Advocate Bongo Mvinjelwa, representing the state, opposed the postponement, arguing it would further delay the case and prejudice the state. Mvinjelwa also accused Mohiudeen of employing “Stalingrad tactics” to delay the proceedings. Despite these concerns, Judge Govindjee ruled in favor of a postponement, explaining that while there were suspicions of delay tactics, Mohiudeen had not received the necessary documents in time, and he needed an opportunity to familiarize himself with the arguments.
A new hearing date was set for November 28. Outside court, Mohiudeen maintained his innocence, stating he had been wrongfully accused and denied proper legal representation. He argued that the real culprits were the Samuels, who he claimed had received permission from Swartz to remove the railway line. Mohiudeen also expressed frustration over what he described as a “trial by media,” which he felt had damaged his reputation. He suggested that the Apartheid-era Criminal Procedures Act was being used against him inappropriately.