CPR3701
OCT/NOV EXAM 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 2025
, Criminal Procedure
Question 1
Legality of F and G’s actions (10 marks)
The actions of F and G in breaking open the door without a warrant are unlawful in
terms of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (CPA). Section 25(1) of the Constitution
of South Africa, 1996 guarantees the right to privacy, including the right not to have
one’s home searched without lawful authority. According to section 26 of the CPA, a
police officer may enter premises without a warrant only under specific circumstances
— for example, when a suspect is being pursued immediately after committing an
offence, or where obtaining a warrant would defeat the object of the entry.
In this case, the alleged robbery occurred 10 years earlier, meaning there was no
urgency or immediate pursuit. The police could have easily obtained a search or arrest
warrant before entering. Their forced entry therefore constitutes an unlawful search
and violation of the suspects’ constitutional rights. In Minister of Safety and
Security v Van der Merwe 2011 (5) SA 61 (CC), the Constitutional Court emphasized
that search and entry without a warrant must be justified strictly by law and necessity.
Accordingly, F and G acted unlawfully by breaking down the door and entering the
premises without a warrant or urgent justification.
Question 2.1
Whether the arrest conforms with section 39 of the CPA (10 marks)
Section 39(1) of the CPA provides that an arrest must be effected by actually touching
or confining the body of the person or by the person submitting to custody. The
arresting officer must:
OCT/NOV EXAM 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 2025
, Criminal Procedure
Question 1
Legality of F and G’s actions (10 marks)
The actions of F and G in breaking open the door without a warrant are unlawful in
terms of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977 (CPA). Section 25(1) of the Constitution
of South Africa, 1996 guarantees the right to privacy, including the right not to have
one’s home searched without lawful authority. According to section 26 of the CPA, a
police officer may enter premises without a warrant only under specific circumstances
— for example, when a suspect is being pursued immediately after committing an
offence, or where obtaining a warrant would defeat the object of the entry.
In this case, the alleged robbery occurred 10 years earlier, meaning there was no
urgency or immediate pursuit. The police could have easily obtained a search or arrest
warrant before entering. Their forced entry therefore constitutes an unlawful search
and violation of the suspects’ constitutional rights. In Minister of Safety and
Security v Van der Merwe 2011 (5) SA 61 (CC), the Constitutional Court emphasized
that search and entry without a warrant must be justified strictly by law and necessity.
Accordingly, F and G acted unlawfully by breaking down the door and entering the
premises without a warrant or urgent justification.
Question 2.1
Whether the arrest conforms with section 39 of the CPA (10 marks)
Section 39(1) of the CPA provides that an arrest must be effected by actually touching
or confining the body of the person or by the person submitting to custody. The
arresting officer must:
