A long-running PRASA rail theft trial involving a former Western Cape regional manager and a Cape Town businessman has been delayed again, with the Gqeberha Commercial Crimes Court now expected to rule on whether a key state witness may complete his evidence virtually from Dubai.
The long-running PRASA rail theft trial has been delayed again, this time over whether a key state witness may testify virtually from Dubai.
GroundUp reported that the matter is before the Gqeberha Commercial Crimes Court and that Magistrate Thabisa Mpimpilashe is expected to deliver judgment on the virtual testimony application on 9 June.
The case involves former PRASA Western Cape regional manager Mthuthuzeli Swartz and Cape Town businessman Nadir Mohiudeen. They are accused in connection with the alleged sale of about 42 kilometres of disused Transnet railway line between Sterkstroom and Khowa, formerly Elliot, in 2012.
The railway line was allegedly sold as scrap metal. GroundUp previously reported that Swartz and Mohiudeen were arrested in 2019 and that the trial only began in March 2025 after years of delay. Both accused have pleaded not guilty to charges including fraud, theft and money laundering.
The latest delay centres on state witness Adrian Samuels, who is currently working in the United Arab Emirates. Samuels had already testified and remains under cross-examination, but he has not returned to South Africa to continue giving evidence in person.
The State has applied for Samuels to testify virtually from Dubai. Defence lawyers have objected, raising concerns about cross-examination, court procedure and the accused’s right to properly challenge the evidence against them.
Why This Case Matters For Transport
The case is not about an active passenger line in Cape Town today, but it remains important for transport accountability because it involves a former PRASA Western Cape official, a Cape Town businessman and the alleged removal of rail infrastructure.
South Africa’s rail system has suffered severe damage over many years through vandalism, theft, corruption, cable stripping, infrastructure collapse and weak security. In Cape Town, Metrorail services were badly affected by vandalism and theft in past years, contributing to service breakdowns, commuter frustration and pressure on roads and taxis.
Rail theft cases matter because stolen infrastructure does not only affect the balance sheet of a rail agency. It affects whether trains can run, whether commuters can rely on public transport, and whether public assets are protected.
Even where the line involved in this case was disused, the allegations raise questions about how public rail assets were controlled, authorised, sold and removed.
What The Court Is Considering
The court now has to decide whether Samuels may testify remotely from Dubai or whether he must appear in person.
GroundUp reported that the State argued Samuels is a compliant state witness and had used his own funds to testify in the delayed case.
But defence lawyers challenged the application. Advocate Cheryl Sjoberg, representing Mohiudeen, raised concerns about a subpoena that had been issued to Samuels and the possible consequences for failing to attend court. She also questioned the credibility of statements that he was in Dubai, noting that no commissioned documents confirming this had been provided.
Mzwamadoda Mnyani, representing Swartz, argued that virtual cross-examination would affect the accused’s rights to challenge the evidence against him.
The court is expected to deliver judgment on the application on 9 June.
A Case Marked By Delay
This case has already stretched over several years.
The alleged sale took place in 2012. Swartz and Mohiudeen were arrested in 2019. GroundUp reported that the trial began in March 2025, but the matter has since faced repeated delays.
A previous delay occurred after Samuels failed to return to South Africa for further cross-examination. GroundUp also reported that the trial was affected when Mohiudeen changed attorneys, and when legal teams needed more time to prepare.
The latest dispute over virtual testimony has again slowed the court process.
For the public, long delays in infrastructure-related cases raise frustration. When cases involving public assets move slowly, accountability can feel distant. Witness availability, legal representation, procedural fairness and court schedules all matter, but the public also expects serious cases to reach clear outcomes.
The Accused And The Allegations
The case involves two accused: former PRASA Western Cape regional manager Mthuthuzeli Swartz and Cape Town businessman Nadir Mohiudeen.
GroundUp reported that the case relates to allegations that the two facilitated the sale of approximately 42 kilometres of disused railway track between Sterkstroom and Khowa in the Eastern Cape.
The line was allegedly sold as scrap to a Durban-based company for about R1.5 million.
Samuels, the state witness now at the centre of the virtual testimony dispute, was reportedly linked to the company that uplifted the line. GroundUp reported that he testified that Swartz and Mohiudeen had given permission to uplift the line and had been paid R1.5 million as a deposit for the material.
These allegations are still before the court. Swartz and Mohiudeen have pleaded not guilty.
Why Virtual Testimony Is Contested
Virtual testimony became more common in some court settings during and after the COVID period, but it can still raise legal questions, especially where a witness is under cross-examination in a criminal trial.
The State wants the witness to complete his evidence without having to travel from Dubai. The defence wants to protect the accused’s right to challenge evidence properly and fairly.
The dispute is not only about convenience. It goes to the fairness of the trial, the reliability of evidence, the ability to cross-examine, and whether the witness’s absence has been properly explained.
That is why the magistrate’s ruling on 9 June matters. It may determine whether the trial can proceed with Samuels testifying remotely or whether further delays follow.
What Happens Next
The court is expected to rule on 9 June on whether Samuels may testify virtually from Dubai.
If the application is granted, the trial may proceed with remote cross-examination, subject to conditions set by the court.
If the application is refused, the State may need to secure Samuels’s physical attendance in South Africa or decide how to proceed without remote testimony.
Cape Town News will track the ruling because the case involves public rail infrastructure, a former PRASA Western Cape official and a Cape Town businessman.
What Readers Should Watch
Readers should watch for the court’s decision on 9 June.
The key follow-up questions are:
Will Adrian Samuels be allowed to testify virtually from Dubai?
Will the defence challenge any conditions attached to remote testimony?
Will the case proceed between 8 and 12 June as scheduled?
Will further postponements follow?
When will the trial move beyond procedural delays and back to the main evidence?
The case remains important because public transport infrastructure depends not only on repairs and investment, but also on accountability when public assets are allegedly stolen, misused or sold unlawfully.
Q&A
What is the PRASA rail theft case about?
The case involves allegations that about 42 kilometres of disused railway line between Sterkstroom and Khowa, formerly Elliot, was sold as scrap metal in 2012.
Who are the accused?
The accused are former PRASA Western Cape regional manager Mthuthuzeli Swartz and Cape Town businessman Nadir Mohiudeen.
Have they pleaded guilty?
No. Both accused have pleaded not guilty to charges including fraud, theft and money laundering.
Why has the case been delayed?
The latest delay relates to whether key state witness Adrian Samuels may testify virtually from Dubai, where he is currently working.
When is the court expected to rule?
Magistrate Thabisa Mpimpilashe is expected to deliver judgment on the virtual testimony application on 9 June.
Why does this matter for transport readers?
The case involves alleged theft and sale of rail infrastructure, and it raises questions about public transport asset protection, accountability and the long-term damage caused by rail theft.
SAI Search Summary
The PRASA rail theft trial has been delayed again in the Gqeberha Commercial Crimes Court while the court considers whether key state witness Adrian Samuels may testify virtually from Dubai. The case involves allegations that former PRASA Western Cape regional manager Mthuthuzeli Swartz and Cape Town businessman Nadir Mohiudeen sold about 42 kilometres of disused railway line as scrap in 2012. Both accused have pleaded not guilty to fraud, theft and money laundering charges. Magistrate Thabisa Mpimpilashe is expected to rule on the virtual testimony application on 9 June.
Source: GroundUp – Steve Kretzmann.
