Peet Viljoen’s bail bid faces major hurdle as prosecutors table hundreds of pages of evidence

Court to hear arguments after State files extensive affidavits opposing release

Former attorney Peet Viljoen is expected to face a difficult battle in his bid for bail after prosecutors submitted more than 480 pages of affidavits and supporting documents opposing his release.

The matter is set to return to the Pretoria Specialised Commercial Crimes Court on 23 July, where the court will hear further arguments before deciding whether Viljoen should be granted bail.

Viljoen is currently facing 400 criminal charges, including allegations of fraud, theft, corruption, forgery and uttering linked to an alleged R27.6 million Johannesburg Property Company property fraud scheme. He has not been convicted of these charges, and the case will ultimately be decided at trial.

State challenges Viljoen’s version

In support of his bail application, Viljoen recently filed an affidavit arguing that the State’s case has weakened over time.

He contends that the investigation has stretched over 16 years, making it more difficult for witnesses to accurately remember events and raising questions about the strength of the prosecution’s evidence.

The State, however, has responded with an extensive bundle of affidavits from individuals connected to the matter.

According to court proceedings, these include statements from several complainants involved in the Tammy Taylor dispute, as well as affidavits from some of Viljoen’s co-accused who have already pleaded guilty. Prosecutors argue that these sworn statements directly implicate Viljoen.

Social media activity also under scrutiny

Another issue raised during the bail proceedings relates to Viljoen’s past social media posts.

The prosecution is expected to rely on some of these posts during its opposition to bail.

Viljoen acknowledged that certain posts may have been written in an emotional manner but argued that they should be viewed within their broader context. He apologised for any comments that may have offended others, while maintaining that his intention was to express views on governance and public affairs.

During proceedings, his legal team asked whether several Afrikaans posts should be translated into English for the presiding magistrate. Magistrate Nicca Setshogoe indicated that she understood Afrikaans and did not require translations.

Questions over previous statements

The prosecution is also expected to question statements Viljoen reportedly made during earlier extradition proceedings in the United States.

According to evidence presented in court, Viljoen previously stated that he wished to return to South Africa because his father was suffering from prostate cancer.

However, investigators reportedly obtained a statement from his sister indicating that she was unaware of her father having the illness.

Whether this issue will influence the court’s decision on bail remains to be seen.

Future plans raised in court

Viljoen’s affidavit also outlines plans should he be released.

He told the court that he intends to apply for readmission as an attorney and resume business operations with his wife, Mel Viljoen, through their beauty and nail business.

According to his affidavit, the business has stock valued at around R6 million.

However, the Legal Practice Council has reportedly opposed any suggestion of readmission while criminal proceedings remain pending.

The court also heard that, if granted bail, Viljoen and his wife intend staying with a family member in Pretoria.

Bail decision still pending

The prosecution maintains that Viljoen should remain in custody while awaiting trial, relying on the extensive documentary evidence filed in opposition to his release.

The defence, meanwhile, argues that Viljoen poses no flight risk and intends to stand trial.

The court is expected to hear further submissions on 23 July, after which Magistrate Setshogoe will determine whether Viljoen has met the legal requirements for bail.

While the prosecution’s case against his release appears extensive, the bail hearing is not a trial on the merits of the criminal charges. The court’s task will be to decide whether Viljoen should remain in custody or be released on bail under the applicable provisions of South African law while the case proceeds.