NPA Statement on the Dave King Matter
Mr David Cunningham King, the accused in the case of The State versus DC King (Case no.: CC257/2005 – otherwise referred to as the King 1 case), today entered a plea of guilty in the South Gauteng High Court held at Palm Ridge, on 41 counts of various contraventions of section 75 of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, as per the indictment.
The said plea is in accordance with a plea and sentence agreement in terms of section 105A (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act 51 of 1977, entered into between the accused and the National Prosecuting Authority. The High Court was satisfied that the aforesaid agreement complied with the requirements of the provisions of section 105A (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, that the accused admitted the allegations in the above-mentioned counts and that he was guilty of the offences.
The Court was moreover satisfied that the sentence agreement was just, whereupon the Court proceeded to convict the accused of the offences and sentenced the accused in accordance with the sentence agreement.
In terms of the agreement, the accused was sentenced to a fine of R80,000.00 or 24 months’ imprisonment on each of the 41 counts, being the maximum sentence provided for in the Income Tax Act read with the Adjustment of Fines Act 101 of 1991. The effective sentence, as confirmed in the agreement, is a fine of R3 280 000.00 or 984 months (82 years) imprisonment.
The accused has, moreover, agreed to pay to the Criminal Assets Recovery Account (“CARA”) the amount of R8.75 million as contemplated in section 64(e) of Act 121 of 1998. This payment will be effected within 30 days of the plea agreement having been finalised today. The plea and sentence agreement was entered into having due regard to the following factors, as stipulated in the agreement:
1. the State consulted with the complainants, being representatives of the South African Revenue Service (“SARS”) and representatives of the South African Reserve Bank (“SARB”), and afforded them the
opportunity to make representations; as required by the law.
2. the said complainants, namely SARS and SARB, are satisfied with the agreement as entered into;
3. SARS has instituted various actions against the accused relevant to the offences and will (in terms of the actions and by agreement with the accused) recover an amount of R 706.7 million (figure verified by SARS);
4. the accused has reached an agreement with SARS and SARB to settle all disputes between them. In terms of the agreement with SARS, the accused has entered into an agreement to settle his tax indebtedness with SARS and has reached a settlement with SARB;
5. the length of the trial should the accused plead not guilty, and the consequent burden on the criminal justice system;
6. the trial related prejudice by virtue of material witnesses who have passed away or have become unavailable or unable to testify;
7. the expense to which the State would be put by such a trial, which would be lengthy and require the testimony of experts and witnesses based in foreign countries;
8. the nature, aggravating circumstances and facts relating to the offences;
9. the personal circumstances of the accused;
10. the fact that the accused has no previous convictions;
11. the interests of society.