Pretoria - Legal expert Zola Majavu says it is not unusual for a defence lawyer to withdraw during court proceedings, but it is “unusual for a lawyer to withdraw in the manner my colleague advocate Malesela Teffo did” from the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial.
“What is more peculiar are the reasons advanced. It sounds like someone not properly schooled in the rules of procedure or who simply cannot accept that sometimes as lawyers, decisions do not go our clients’ way,” Majavu said.
He described Teffo’s conduct as “simply unacceptable” and “inexcusable”.
It came as a shock last week when Teffo, counsel for accused number one to four in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, withdrew from the case.
The trial reconvened on Monday to consider an application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to try the accused.
The proceedings took an unexpected turn when Teffo, who loomed large as the main character, refocused the court’s attention on the alleged mistreatment of one of his clients incarcerated at Kgosi Mampuru II Correctional Services.
His clients are Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya, Bongani Ntanzi, Mthobisi Ncube and Mthokoziseni Maphisa. The fifth accused, Fisokuhle Ntuli, is represented by advocate Zandile Mshololo.
Teffo cried foul that his client, Ncube, was kept in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day and given just an hour to exercise.
It was his decision to abandon his application to challenge the court’s jurisdiction that seemingly triggered emotions to run high in court.
Teffo, it was said, had taken the route of submitting an application to the Office of the National Director of Public Prosecutions to have charges against his clients dropped. It came to light in court that he failed to communicate his new decision to Judge Tshifhiwa Maumela, who was unhappy with his conduct.
“I want to know what is the position about the heads which I don’t have on my table,” Judge Maumela angrily told Teffo, who kept interjecting.
When the matter around jurisdiction was finally closed, Teffo raised issues about the safety of his client in prison.
The issue became a bone of contention when he asked that a court interpreter read out a letter detailing the conditions to which his client was being subjected. Mshololo held the view that Teffo’s matter was diverting the court from its purpose of the day.
But before Mshololo could take the stand, Teffo had a heated exchange of words with Judge Maumela. He told the judge that he would not listen to Mshololo because “whatever affects accused one to four is not the business of Mshololo”.
The judge told him to close his ears if he didn’t want to listen to Mshololo.
“Mshololo is so lucky, your Lordship,” Teffo said as he took his seat.
The judge retorted: “And you are so lucky. You are pulling this court to and fro as you like, as if we are here at your mercy, and we are not.”
Teffo earlier told the court that it had become a norm that whenever he raised issues on behalf of his clients, he was reprimanded for not following court procedures. “Which court am I attending and Mshololo is attending? Which school of law did I attend and Mshololo didn’t attend?” he asked.
Judge Maumela responded: “I have been wondering about that … to an extent of wondering whether it was a day or night school. I have really been wondering. A simple issue of sharing information – now you are ranting about it as if it is something unheard of.”
Teffo said: “The cat is out of the bag today. I am happy.”
The proceedings ended in dramatic fashion when Teffo dropped the bombshell, announcing his withdrawal from the case. He claimed that harassment by the State, Judge Maumela and the police – who arrested him inside the courtroom in April on charges of contempt of court for an unrelated matter – informed his decision to step back.
He told Judge Maumela that he could not be in court to face him because there were “serious allegations whereby you are accused number one”.
He implicated President Cyril Ramaphosa in an alleged plot to remove him from the case, saying a plan was hatched in his office.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, later refuted the claims, saying they were unsubstantiated and baseless claims that are mischievous and harmful to the standing of the Office of the President.
Teffo’s conduct in court, according to some legal experts, left much to be desired.
Advocate Modidima Mannya said a defence lawyer cannot “dictate” to the court’s presiding officer “how the procedure should be because there are rules and that person has the authority to ensure that the rules are complied with”.
“The biggest challenge in this matter has been that the defence for accused one to four has not been following the procedures prescribed,” Mannya said in an interview.
He also took issue with the manner in which Teffo withdrew from the case. “The same applies if you were to withdraw in a matter of this nature; you have to make a detailed application to court to indicate why you are withdrawing,” he said.
He distanced himself from Teffo’s conduct, saying it didn’t represent the legal profession. “I don’t think it should be a standard and I don’t think people should look at us as people who behave in that manner.”
Teffo has promised to lay out his claims in a press briefing soon.
Pretoria News