Danny Jordaan Fraud Case Postponed Again Until April 14

The corruption and fraud case involving Danny Jordaan, president of the South African Football Association (SAFA), has once again been postponed. Proceedings have now been adjourned to April 14.

The latest delay follows the appointment of a new defence lawyer. Advocate Leana Fick has taken over representation of accused number two and four, Trevor Neethling and his PR firm, Grit Communications, under the instruction of James Ndebele. The court granted her time to study the amended charge sheet received on Tuesday and consult with her clients.

This marks another setback in a case that has already experienced multiple postponements.

Previous Legal Challenges

The matter was previously stalled at the Palm Ridge Magistrate’s Court after an application by Ndebele seeking the recusal of state prosecutor Moagi Malebati, alleging “tainting.” Although that application was dismissed in December, it has now been formally abandoned.

While the state has indicated readiness to proceed to trial, defence counsel Victor Nkwashu — representing Jordaan, SAFA CFO Gronie Hluyo, and former acting CEO Russell Paul — opposed setting a trial date.

Nkwashu argued that the case should be struck off the roll pending the outcome of a High Court challenge to the legality of the March 2024 search and seizure operation at SAFA’s Nasrec headquarters. He maintained that the defence would not agree to a trial date until that matter is resolved, describing the latest adjournment as purposeless.

According to the defence, the High Court hearing is scheduled for April 27, though it may be rescheduled as the date falls on a public holiday.

Dispute Over Evidence and Arrests

Nkwashu also questioned whether the state’s case relies entirely on evidence obtained during the Nasrec raid or whether prosecutors possess independent evidence to proceed without it. Prosecutor Malebati rejected this suggestion, stating that all evidence in the state’s possession is properly documented and dated.

In a related development, the defence has referred another matter to the High Court challenging the legality of the arrests carried out on November 13, 2024. Nkwashu argued that the arrests were unnecessary, citing an interdict application that was due to be heard the following day.

The state dismissed the claim, asserting that there was nothing unlawful about the arrests, as the interdict application had neither been heard nor granted at the time.

With fresh legal manoeuvres and pending High Court rulings, the high-profile case continues to face uncertainty, further delaying the commencement of substantive trial proceedings.