By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The State has withdrawn the theft charges against South African Football Association (SAFA) boss Danny Jordaan and his co-accused, SAFA chief financial officer Gronie Hluyo.
The 73-year-old administrator was arrested in November 2024 alongside Hluyo and businessman Trevor Neethling. The trio are out on bail of R20,000 each, and they have each vehemently denied any wrongdoing.
Jordaan is accused of spending R1.3 million of the association’s money for his personal benefit.
The State’s version is that between 2014 and 2018, he used the organisation’s resources for personal gain, including an allegations that he hired a private security company for personal protection, as well as a public relations company without the board’s authorisation.
The prosecution revealed this on Friday when Jordaan, Hluyo and Neethling appeared in the Specialised Commercial Crimes Court in Palm Ridge.
State advocate Moagi Malebati said the State revised its charge sheet and removed the three theft charges against Jordaan and Hluyo.
Both of them are still charged with three counts of fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit fraud.
Jordaan’s legal representative, Norman Arendse, said the embattled soccer executive was struggling to perform his duties fully because of the strict conditions of his bail.
Although Hluyo and Neethling’s passports were confiscated and they are barred from travelling outside South Africa, Jordaan is allowed to leave the country. The only condition is that he has to provide the investigating officer with a written itinerary at least 72 hours before departure when his work takes him out of the country.
Arendse said Jordaan was unable to fulfil his duties to the fullest extent as a result of this condition and asked the court to have it relaxed. The Safa boss’s legal representative said his client had a number of responsibilities that required him to travel out of the country, including being a “special adviser” to Confederation of African Football (Caf) president, Patrice Motsepe.
“He has committed to [abiding by his stipulated bail conditions]. He has done it several times. He remains a special adviser to the president of Caf and the executive. Sometimes arrangements have to be made at short notice,” Arendse said in court.
“We don’t think that there’s any prejudice from this condition being relaxed or removed. He has paid his bail and remains on bail,” he added.
However, magistrate Sheron Soko-Rantao told Arendse he will have to bring a formal application, to be heard by a different magistrate, if he seeks to alter the conditions that were set when Jordaan was granted bail in November.
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) welcomed Soko-Rantao’s stance on relaxing Jordaan’s bail condition, NPA Gauteng spokesperson Phindi Mjonondwane told journalists at the East Rand court.
“You would recall that a formal bail application sat before court and the court made a ruling. The court which is seized by this matter currently was not part of the bail application process. Hence this court indicated that if the accused wants to have certain conditions of his bail altered, then he must bring a formal application,” Mjonondwane stated.
“As the State we are opposed to that [alteration of bail conditions] because the bail application court dealt with all the evidence that was presented in court and came to what we believe is a just decision. It was able to set bail conditions which are suitable for both the State and the defence,” Mjonondwane added.
Arendse said his clients, Hluyo and Jordaan, have taken up the option to have Soko-Rantao’s ruling from December reviewed at the High Court. In December, they brought an application seeking to have the case struck off the roll completely. The magistrate dismissed it and indicated there was enough meat for the case to proceed.
“We respectfully disagree with your ruling on 10 December 2024 and we’ve filed an application to review that decision… That will inevitably result in a delay,” Arendse said.
The case has been postponed to 15 August 2025, pending the ventilation of all outstanding matters. This includes the defence’s review of Soko-Rantao’s dismissal of their application. If resolutions are forthcoming in time, it might be moved to an earlier date.