Pretoria - The Senzo Meyiwa murder trial was yesterday postponed by the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, in order to determine a way forward regarding the jurisdiction of the case and consult the roll planner.
This came after advocate Malesela Teffo, the defence counsel for accused one to four, said he felt the court was doing everything in its powers to mute him during his attempts to make submissions in defence of his clients.
Teffo informed the court he was vehemently opposed to the matter being postponed to the later date of September and November this year, and January next year, as suggested by the court roll planner.
He said the reason behind his refusal was due to the fact that the accused felt as though “justice delayed is justice denied. I am of the strong conviction that the rights of my clients are deliberately violated by the court I expect to be impartial.”
Teffo informed the court that he had been instructed by the accused to apply for the presiding judge to be recused as they felt justice would be denied to them.
“For me to make a submission on behalf of my clients you are saying to me sit down like I am a naughty boy. I may be a naughty boy but I deserve respect from this court as it would expect the same from me.”
He subsequently informed the court that they were against the postponement as they realised there was a material defect that did not give the court the jurisdiction to hear and grant the application brought by advocate Zandile Mshololo.
Teffo insisted that the jurisdiction of the matter was under the South Gauteng division and he was of the view that the procedure in terms of the rights given to the minister of justice to give jurisdiction had been grossly violated.
“This court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain this case and it is therefore in the same spirit that the contemplated application of Mshololo is being brought at the wrong court.”
The request for a longer postponement came after Mshololo requested time to go through the second docket in the matter, which she was only alerted to last week.
In addition, she informed the court she would still require time to consult her client and decide on which applications to bring forth in the matter.
Mshololo highlighted that in terms of the criminal procedure act there was no application that could be brought while she was still conducting her cross-examination, and as a result, would request the court to afford her an opportunity to finish her cross-examination and only then seek to listen to other possible applications.
Earlier the court heard that the decision by the South Gauteng Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to prosecute singer Kelly Khumalo and other occupants in the house on the night Senzo Meyiwa was shot was not a decision but merely an opinion.
This opinion was said to have been written by a junior State advocate within the DPP’s office and was reported to be without any merit.
“Clarity sought regarding purported correspondence from the South Gauteng DPP in the murder trial of Senzo Meyiwa as per case 636, dated June 10 2022 refers. This office did not make any decision or otherwise regarding the case docket.
“The alleged document does not have any status as such was an internal opinion from a junior State advocate which was without merit,” read Mshololo, the defence counsel for the fifth accused, Sifisokuhle Ntuli.
Last week, Mshololo halted her cross-examination of Sergeant Thabo Johannes Mosia, a forensic officer, attached to the Springs criminal record and crime scene management division, as a result of new information she alleged had only just recently been disclosed to the defence team.
Mshololo said through this the defence had learnt of the existence of two case dockets, 375 and 636, with separate directives from different prosecuting authorities on the same incident.
She indicated the reason she had an issue continuing with the cross-examination was as a result of one of the statements made by Mosia not being disclosed to the defence counsel before the start of the trial.
State advocate George Baloyi said as far as the existence of the second docket was concerned, the former counsel for the third accused, Mthobisi Mncube, had as early as January 25, requested further particulars and directed a letter to the State requesting contents of case docket 375.
Baloyi said already in January this year, the defence counsel for the accused had been aware of the existence of the second docket.
He further indicated that the State had as of March 23, written a letter directed to investigating officer Lieutenant-Colonel Buthelezi requesting a copy of the docket so it can be disclosed to all the defence counsels.
Baloyi said although the officer was given the deadline of March 30, she allegedly came to the State’s office but only gave the copy of the second docket to Teffo. He said the reason the State wanted to inform the court of this was due to reports that the second docket had “mysteriously surfaced” recently which was not the case.
Pretoria News