South Africa has taken another step in its efforts to extradite Prophet Shepherd Bushiri and his wife, Mary Bushiri, after filing an application asking the Malawi High Court for permission to appeal against a judgment that stopped their extradition.
The Republic of South Africa has listed 14 grounds on which it wants to challenge the decision by High Court Judge Mzonde Mvula, arguing that the judge made several mistakes in applying the law and handling evidence in the case.
An application for leave to appeal is a formal request asking a court for permission to challenge its decision before a higher court. It does not mean an appeal has already been granted or that the earlier judgment has been overturned. The court must first decide whether South Africa has sufficient legal grounds to take the matter to a higher court.
Director of Criminal Litigation Dzikondianthu Malunda confirmed the development, saying South Africa was dissatisfied with the High Court’s decision.
“I can confirm that the documents you have seen are authentic. The Republic of South Africa has filed an application for leave to appeal against the High Court judgment that stopped the extradition of Shepherd Bushiri and his wife, Mary Bushiri. We have outlined 14 grounds on which we are challenging the decision,” Malunda said.
The Notice of Appeal, dated November 6, 2026, was received by the High Court Criminal Registry in Lilongwe on November 9, 2026.
The application is expected to be heard by Mvula on a date yet to be fixed.
In its application, South Africa argues that Mvula made several legal errors when he overturned an earlier decision by the Lilongwe Chief Resident Magistrate’s Court, which had ordered the couple to be sent to South Africa to face the charges against them.
One of South Africa’s main arguments is that the judge treated the extradition proceedings like an ordinary criminal trial instead of following the specific legal rules that apply when one country asks another to hand over people wanted for criminal prosecution.
South Africa also argues that the judge used the wrong standard when assessing the evidence presented to support the extradition request.
It says the court was supposed to establish whether there was enough evidence to justify putting the couple on trial if the alleged offences had been committed in Malawi, rather than determining their guilt or innocence.
The government is further challenging the finding that the Bushiris were denied a fair hearing during the extradition proceedings.
It argues that the couple participated in the proceedings and had opportunities to question a State witness, present documents and make submissions before the court.
South Africa is also questioning the judge’s decision to reject some documents presented in support of the extradition request because of concerns about hearsay and whether they had been properly authenticated.
It maintains that the court did not correctly apply the provisions of the Extradition Act when deciding whether the documents could be accepted as evidence.
On concerns about the couple’s safety if returned to South Africa, the government argues that the High Court did not have enough evidence to conclude that the extradition request was politically motivated or that the couple would face unfair treatment.
It also disputes the finding that returning the couple to South Africa would be unjust or oppressive because of the time that has passed since the alleged offences.
South Africa argues that the court did not properly consider the reasons for the delay or establish whether it would make a fair trial impossible.
The application also challenges the High Court’s decision to dismiss the extradition request in its entirety, arguing that the judge made errors in exercising his review powers.
The latest development follows Mvula’s October 12, 2026 judgment, which overturned a March 12, 2025 decision by the Lilongwe Chief Resident Magistrate’s Court ordering the couple’s extradition to South Africa.
The Bushiris returned to Malawi from South Africa in November 2020 while on bail and have remained in the country. South African authorities want them returned to face allegations involving fraud, theft and money laundering.
The couple have denied wrongdoing and have previously raised concerns about their safety and whether they would receive a fair trial in South Africa.
If Mvula grants South Africa leave to appeal, the government will be allowed to take its challenge to a higher court, which will then consider the legal arguments and decide whether the October 12 judgment should stand or be overturned.
If permission is refused, South Africa may still have further legal options, depending on the applicable court rules.
For now, the October 12 judgment stopping the extradition remains in force
