Reference no: EM133263119

At the close of the defence case, the magistrate, M, convicts A on multiple charges of fraud, and proceeds to the sentencing phase without giving the reasons for arriving at the verdicts. When called upon by the defence to proffer such reasons, M merely repeats the evidence presented by the prosecution, and insinuates that 'the accused was found guilty on the basis of proven evidence which is already on record' without necessarily advancing his own submissions for the conclusions.

Discuss, M conduct, in light of the Supreme Court of Appeal's judgment in National Director of Public Prosecutions v Naidoo 2011 (1) SACR 336 (SCA), where the court concluded, inter alia, that: "The importance of furnishing reasons for a judgment is a salutary practice... ensuring public confidence in the administration of justice".