NONE OF CROWN WITNESSES IMPLICATES MPS IN RIOTS

MBABANE – In a statement of witnesses that has been forwarded by the Crown to the court, none of them mentioned MPs Mduduzi Bacede Mabuza and Mthandeni Dube, save for one who alleges that the former gave him money for transport to attend a meeting at Hosea.

During the pre-trial conference of the MPs, the prosecution stated that it had over 50 witnesses, but would not be in a position to disclose their identities due to security reasons. In their statements, the witnesses did not mention anything about being incited by either of the legislators. There are about 10 statements which have been annexed to the bail application filed by the two incarcerated legislators and most of them are from Hlatikhulu and Lavumisa. Some of the witnesses are Asian businesspeople whose shops were looted and burnt during the political unrest in the country. Most of the witnesses informed investigators about what they saw and the damages caused following the looting and vandalism of various properties.

Incite

The duo stand accused of acting jointly with Siphofaneni Member of Parliament Mduduzi ‘Magawugawu’ Simelane in inciting people of Eswatini to revolt against government. It is alleged that as a consequence of the alleged incitement by the trio, there were riots in all the regions of  the country. According to the prosecution, these riots caused a loss of life, bodily injury to people and destruction of private and public properties. In their new bail application,  the duo argued that there was absolutely no casual link between them and the acts of terrorism that are alleged to have been committed at their instance. They told the court that the statements of the witnesses furnished to their attorneys were all of a general nature, dealing in essence with damages suffered by the deponents during the looting. Meanwhile, in a confirmatory affidavit, the two MPs’ lawyer, Thulani Maseko, submitted that on August 20, 2021, he was handed a number of statements by witnesses. “I have perused them carefully and categorically state that the statements are all, in essence, of a general nature, dealing with looting and damages suffered by the witnesses. Not one of these witnesses implicate the applicants (Mabuza and Dube),” argued the lawyer.

Maseko further highlighted that at this stage, he had not received any further statements or any evidentiary material, linking the applicants with the alleged crimes. “During the pre-trial conference on August 2021, the prosecution undertook to serve  us with audio and video recordings and further statements of witnesses by close of business on that day, but to date we have not received any,” submitted Maseko. It was further his averment that the criminal case against the applicants remained weak.

Officer

The human rights lawyer also brought it to the attention of the court that he had a conversation with resigned police officer Cebile ‘Cece’ Shongwe, who informed him about her conversation with the retired army commander. “She informed me that the retired army commander told her that the arrest of the applicants was effected at the instance and instruction from His Majesty King Mswati III, who felt that the applicants were the cause of the political unrest and were undermining his authority,” alleged Maseko. He went on to tell the court that on August 18, 2021, a memorandum drafted by the South African advocate who is representing the State appeared in the media. The memorandum, which was written by Advocate Gareth Leppan, now forms part of the MPs contention that there was allegedly no case against them.

In the memorandum, the advocate stated that: “Having perused the available materials thus far, it is apparent that there is no source of evidence that proves the case against one or more of the suspects, but rather presents a mosaic, which at this stage, does not contain all the required pieces, and it is thus to these missing pieces that this memorandum is directed.” In the correspondence, the advocate went on to state that, a perusal of the translated statements of Mabuza and Dube revealed that the contents thereof were not necessarily consistent with the affidavits deposed to by certain persons who were present when the speeches were made.

Sedition

He further stated that various offences relating to the actions and/or words of the suspects potentially came to mind, including sedition, treason, public violence, offences under the Suppression of Terrorism Act, incitement to commit the said offences, refusal to obey police officers’ lawful commands and even as discussed, murder. “However, as it stands, no one offence has its elements fully satisfied. In my view, this may as well be corrected by further attention to the speeches made by the suspects for example. In addition, the proposed further investigation will hopefully reveal the said outstanding evidence,” reads part of Leppan correspondence to the director of public prosecutions (DPP) dated August 10, 2021. Continuing with his confirmatory affidavit, Maseko said in his considered view and taking into account all the above factors, the applicants had no case to answer, but were allegedly being targeted for expressing their views that the King was unhappy with. He told the court that the charges were politically allegedly motivated.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: