Omotoso case back in court as NPA probes acquittal

Televangelist, Timothy Omotoso.

The Gqeberha High Court heard a request for clarification from the state on factual findings in the Omotoso case acquittal judgment.

Judgment in the application by the state for clarification on the acquittal of televangelist, Timothy Omotoso and his co-accused, Lusanda Sulani and Zukiswa Sitho has been set down for Tuesday, next week.

The matter was heard in the Gqeberha High Court in the Eastern Cape, on Monday

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) took its first step towards possibly appealing the acquittal of the trio. Judge Irma Schoeman found Omotoso and his co-accused not guilty on charges including human trafficking and rape in April, this year.

After nearly a decade of legal proceedings, the case involving Timothy Omotoso returned to court. This time for the first part of the state’s appeal process.

In April, Judge Irma Schoeman ruled that the State ailed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Pointing to poor cross-examination, a lack of corroborating evidence and possible prosecutorial misconduct. State advocate, Apla Bodlani says they are seeking clarification of the factual findings that led to the acquittal of the trio, earlier this year.

[WATCH] The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) says it will proceed with its appeal of the acquittal of televangelist Timothy Omotoso, who returned to Nigeria yesterday. Legal Analyst Elton Hart weighs in on the prospects of the NPA’s case. pic.twitter.com/XUPn7iQtlL

— SABC News (@SABCNews) May 19, 2025

“We are not suggesting that my lady alter the judgment. The judgment stands. My lady is not going to alter her own judgment, that procedure is simply unavailable but in order for the state to ask my lady to reserve questions of law, the state has to know what are the factual findings that my lady made in the trial that served before her,” says Bodlani.

The defence came out strongly against the application, with Defence Attorney, Peter Daubermann calling it vague, out of time, and an abuse of the court process.

“In law a question of law under section 319 must arise in the trial in terms of the courts actual findings and facts, it cannot be based on the findings of what the state wishes the court had found. The state has no right of appeal against findings of fact and any legal question must be determined by factual findings, as recorded by the court. The request for clarification is therefore not only procedurally irregular and incompetent but also misconceived in principle,” says Daubermann.

NPA spokesperson, Advocate Mthunzi Mhaga, says they will be bringing the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeals regardless.

“Regardless of the decision that she takes we will take it to the highest court. Because we believe that she was wrong in her approach. But if the decision is to the fact that we are provided those clarifications then well and good for us,” says Mhaga.

Judge Schoeman has reserved judgment in the matter and will hand down her ruling next week Tuesday, the 22nd of July.