High Court quashes bail for man accused of child sexual assault

The High Court has overturned an order releasing a man accused of sexually assaulting a child from his family and has upheld his remand in custody pending trial.

Ibrahim Haneef was arrested on 12 November 2024 on allegations of grooming and sexually assaulting an eight-year-old child. He was initially remanded in custody due to concerns that he could influence witnesses and destroy evidence if released.

In December, Haneef’s lawyer requested the magistrate’s court to release him on bail, citing delays in proceedings and issues with the court’s server system. Following a review of the remand, the magistrate’s court ordered his release on conditions on 21 last month.

The prosecution appealed the decision to the High Court. In its ruling on Sunday, the court said that Haneef’s release did not reduce the risk of influencing witnesses. The court also said it was unclear what system problems had affected the proceedings and how such issues had justified his release.

The court noted that the Constitution did not provide for the release of a person who could pose a risk to society. It said Haneef had originally been detained on the basis that his release would endanger public safety and that this ground had not been taken into account when the remand order was reviewed.

The High Court said that citing system issues alone was not a valid basis for granting bail in such circumstances. It added that one of the charges against Haneef involved the sexual assault of a child in his family and that such cases required consideration of the interests of all children in society.

The court said the Special Procedures Against Child Sexual Offenders Act was intended to protect children and that such protection should be maintained.

Presiding judge Huzaifa Mohamed said the decision to release Haneef on conditional bail was contrary to the procedures set out in the Act. The other two judges on the bench supported the ruling.

The High Court quashed the bail order and directed that the remand order issued by the magistrate’s court remain in force until the conclusion of the trial.