Lawyers in Meyiwa’s case stop questioning disputed legal representation in lower court

30 January 2024 - 20:34
subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now
Muzi Sibiya and Bongani Ntanzi, accused of killing Bafana Bafana keeper Senzo Meyiwa, in the dock at the Pretoria high court.
Muzi Sibiya and Bongani Ntanzi, accused of killing Bafana Bafana keeper Senzo Meyiwa, in the dock at the Pretoria high court.
Image: VELI NHLAPO

Lawyers for two of the five Senzo Meyiwa murder accused opted not to continue with their questioning of a witness on Tuesday during a trial within a trial at the Pretoria high court.

The trial within a trial was to determine the admissibility of the confessions made allegedly by Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya and Bongani Ntanzi.

Ntanzi’s lawyer Thulani Mngomezulu last week turned to old audio court records to try to prove that attorney Ntokozo Mjiyako did not legally represent Ntanzi when he first appeared in the Boksburg magistrate’s court on October 27 2020.

Mngomezulu told the high court on Thursday that Ntanzi had tried to get the magistrate’s attention to inform the court that Mjiyako did not represent him, but his attempts failed.

The high court adjourned the case on Thursday until Tuesday for the state to provide the defence with transcribed copies of the 2020 magistrate’s court’s proceedings. 

When the case resumed on Tuesday, Mngomezulu and adv Charles Mnisi, who represents Mthobisi Mncube, abandoned their questioning on the aspect of representation by Mjiyako.

Ntanzi, Sibiya, Mncube, Mthokoziseni Maphisa and Sifisokuhle Nkani Ntuli are on trial for the murder of Meyiwa.

Meyiwa was shot dead at his then girlfriend Kelly Khumalo’s mother's home in Vosloorus on October 26 2014.

Mnisi said he had no questions stemming from the transcripts, but, however, read out sections which he found to be relevant in the trial within a trial.

The portion that was read included where the magistrate cautioned Ntanzi that he was not allowed to address the court as he was represented by Mjiyako, further stating that he should address the court through Mjiyako.

Another portion included where Ntanzi told the court that Mjiyako was withdrawing as his legal representative because he wanted him to plead guilty to the murder.

In the tape played last week of the magistrate’s court proceedings of October 27 2020, prosecutor George Baloyi places on record that Ntanzi is represented by Mjiyako, while the other accused are not represented. Ntanzi tries to address the court, but the magistrate reminds him he is legally represented and his lawyer should do the talking, referring to Mjiyako. 

Mjiyako then speaks on behalf of Ntanzi, mentioning he will not apply for bail.

When adv Zandile Mshololo, for Ntuli, began her cross-examination, there was an argument as to whether she could put questions to lead investigator, Brig Bongani Gininda on behalf of Ntanzi.

Baloyi argued that Mshololo cannot conduct a cross-examination on behalf of Ntanzi as his legal representative has done so already.

However, after deliberations and case law being read in court, judge Ratha Mokgoatlheng made an exception, allowing her to continue.

Mshololo questioned why Ntanzi’s confession was taken at night if it was done freely and willingly.

Gininda argued that no rule stipulates what time a confession must be taken, also stating that it was done in the interests of justice.

TimesLIVE

subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now

Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.