No Bail for Louis Liebenberg

Tanja Liebenberg

Petition is addressed to

Parliament of South Africa

67 Signatures

Collection finished

67 Signatures

Collection finished

Launched July 2025
Collection finished
Prepare submission
Dialog with recipient
Decision

Petition addressed to: Parliament of South Africa

We, as concerned members of a minority group in South Africa, formally express our support for the State in opposing bail for Louis Petrus Liebenberg.

Our concern stems from the fact that Liebenberg specifically targeted and solicited funds from individuals within our community, using trust, cultural affiliation, and promises of wealth to extract large-scale investments. Many of us were among the primary victims of the alleged fraudulent investment scheme currently under investigation.

We believe that granting Mr. Liebenberg bail would pose a serious threat to the safety and wellbeing of our community. His known associations with underworld criminal networks and alleged mafia contacts raise legitimate fears of witness intimidation, obstruction of justice, and further financial or physical harm to those who previously invested or testified against him.

For these reasons, we respectfully urge the court to deny his bail application in the interest of public safety, justice for the victims, and the integrity of the legal process.

Reason

Risk of tampering or interference
With access to substantial resources and alleged connections, there is concern that Liebenberg could tamper with witnesses or destroy evidence.

Risk to victims and public interest
With many alleged victims still awaiting restitution, supporters argue that releasing him on bail could diminish pressure for full accountability and justice.

Consistency and fairness
Granting bail in high‑profile cases with overwhelming evidence and custodial interference risks undermining confidence in the justice system.

“Given that Louis Petrus Liebenberg is facing more than 42 serious charges of fraud, theft, money laundering, and racketeering—with alleged losses exceeding R4 billion—and considering the strong prima facie case, credible evidence of hidden assets, and concerns that he or his associates might interfere with the case or flee, granting bail would be unjustified and risky. Moreover, his repeated bail delays and lack of legal consultation in custody underline the seriousness of the situation. Courts have already rejected bail for his wife for similar reasons. For the integrity of the judicial process and protection of public trust, bail should continue to be denied.”

Thank you so much for your support, Tanja Liebenberg, Clanwilliam

Question to the initiator