Zandile Mafe consulting with his defence before court on 4 November 2022. Image: Storm Simpson/The South African.
Parliament fire: More time needed to assess Zandile Mafe’s mental health
The case of Zandile Mafe, the man accused of burning parliament, has been postponed as more time is needed for his psychiatric evaluation.
Zandile Mafe consulting with his defence before court on 4 November 2022. Image: Storm Simpson/The South African.
More time is needed to assess the mental health of the man accused of burning parliament, Zandile Mafe.
READ: Eastern Cape Hospital to evaluate Zandile Mafe’s mental health
Judge Postpones Zandile Mafe’s Case as Eastern Cape Hospital Needs More Time for Psychiatric Evaluation
On 28 March, Mafe was sent to the Fort England Hospital in Eastern Cape for 30 days of psychiatric assessment.
On Friday, 5 May, he appeared in absentia in the Cape Town High Court, and Judge Nathan Erasmus postponed the case to 8 June – Mafe was initially expected physically back in court on Monday, 8 May.
READ: Zandile Mafe adamant he will not return to Valkenberg for mental health check
Erasmus said he was told the assessment of the accused still needed to be completed. Mafe is accused of arson, housebreaking with intent to commit arson, terrorism and theft.
As previously reported, this referral is the second time Mafe has been in a State psychiatric facility. He’s been assessed outside the Western Cape because he refused to return to Valkenberg in Cape Town.
READ: Zandile Mafe’s defence concedes there may be issues with his mental health
Mafe’s stay at Valkenberg was cut short after the High Court found that the proper procedures were not followed in the referral. The question of Mafe’s mental health has hung over proceedings ever since. After his arrest in 2022, the accused was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia by a State doctor after a very short observation period.
Practitioners in the Eastern Cape are determining whether Mafe suffered from mental illness or intellectual disability at the time of the alleged offence and whether he was capable of understanding court proceedings.
