It concerns the lawfulness of search and seizure warrants issued in terms of section 29 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998 in the course of an investigation into serious economic crime.

The case was notable partly because of the identity of its plaintiffs: the warrants under scrutiny were issued during the Scorpions' investigation into the Arms Deal and related allegations of corruption by former Deputy President Jacob Zuma and Thales subsidiary Thint.

In the interim, while the judgment was reserved, the Constitutional Court bench laid a complaint with the Judicial Service Commission alleging that Judge John Hlophe, claiming to act on behalf of Zuma, had attempted improperly to influence the opinions of Justices Bess Nkabinde and Chris Jafta.

Citing Investigating Directorate: SEO v Hyundai, the court affirmed that the issuance of section 29 warrants must strike a balance between protecting the privacy interests of individuals and not interfering with the state's constitutionally mandated task of prosecuting crime.

Most importantly, the state had successfully established that a search and seizure operation was reasonable in the circumstances, which was the test set out in section 29 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act; in this case, the operations were reasonable because there was "an appreciable risk, judged objectively, that the state will be unable to obtain the evidence sought by using other means, such as a subpoena".

Justice Sandile Ngcobo filed a dissenting judgment in which he held that the court should uphold the appeals and declare that the search and seizure operations were unlawful.

Second, he held that the prosecution had failed to establish that the warrants were reasonable and necessary; it had not demonstrated that other less intrusive measures, such as a subpoena, would not have been equally effective.

[2]In late June 2008, a month before delivering its judgment, the Constitutional Court bench jointly submitted a formal complaint to the Judicial Service Commission against John Hlophe, the Judge President of the Cape Provincial Division, alleging that he had attempted improperly to influence their decision in the matter.

In the autumn of 2008, while the court's judgment was reserved, Hlophe had separately visited the chambers of Justices Chris Jafta and Bess Nkabinde, pleading for their assistance.