Pretoria - Following arguments, tensions and interruptions between the presiding judge and defence counsel in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial, the Legal Practice Council has reminded all legal practitioners to maintain decorum in the courts.
It issued a notice following the wrapping up of the case last week, saying it noted with concern the decline of decorum in the courts. “The council urges all practitioners to conduct themselves in a dignified manner towards the judiciary, colleagues and all stakeholders, in line with the Legal Practice Act, the Code of Conduct and the high standards expected of the profession,” read the notice.
“The code of conduct is binding on all legal practitioners, aimed at ensuring high standards of professionalism and dignity within the profession.”
The comments come against the backdrop of scenes witnessed in the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, last week, where presiding Judge Tshifhiwa Maumela repeatedly reprimand advocate Malesela Teffo for continuously disregarding court processes and refusing to listen to him.
Teffo, for accused one to four, wanted to make his submissions first and recap the saga of the second docket, a request denied by Judge Maumela.
Meanwhile, the defence counsels of the five men on trial for the murder of Meyiwa have demanded clarity from the Director for Public Prosecutions on whether singer Kelly Khumalo, the soccer star’s girlfriend at the time, and other occupants in the house in which he was killed, would be charged.
As the trial of Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya, Bongani Ntanzi, Mthobisi Mncube, Mthokoziseni Maphisa and Sifisokuhle Ntuli was postponed, the defence counsels of the men demanded clarity on the second docket in the case.
Advocate Zandile Mshololo, legal representative for Ntuli, the fifth accused, requested the court to instruct the prosecution to give clarity on the letters submitted to court which stated that the decision to prosecute Khumalo and other occupants in the house was not a decision but merely an opinion of a junior state advocate.
Mshololo said to prepare further defence on behalf of Ntuli, she required the prosecuting authority in the South Gauteng Division to give adequate clarity as to the purported second docket 375. ““If he is referring to the junior, it means someone superior has to make the final decision and in this respect it is the Director of Public Prosecutions.”
Mshololo was seeking clarity on docket 375 because upon resumption of the trial she wanted to know if the people mentioned would be coming to testify as “suspect witness or accused witness”.
The indictment of the second docket cites the suspects in the murder of Meyiwa as Longwe Twala, Kelly Khumalo, Gladness Khumalo, Zandi Khumalo, Tumelo Madlala, Mthokozisi Twala and Maggie Phiri.
“The clarity sought will clarify the status of these witnesses. It will assist this court if we get clarity on this from the director of prosecutions himself. If he confirms whether a final decision has been made on docket 375 whether to decline prosecution or if this matter is still being investigated or if this docket is to be combined with the docket we are dealing with before this court.”
Teffo, also pleaded with the court to direct the director to issue a “nolle prosequi” (“unwilling to pursue”) certificate to enable the four men to take it further.
He said from the day a decision was made on case docket 636, it was clear that the decision would not be made on case docket 375, and had been confirmed as per the letter from Director of Public Prosecutions South Gauteng Division, Andrew Chauke.
During the engagement of the indictment the response had been that the director had decided to prosecute case docket 636, and on failing to have conviction it would then consider to prosecute on 375, Teffo said. He went as far as speculating that they believed that there was a cover-up afoot in so far as the existence of the two case dockets was concerned.
“Since the decision has been made on 636, our clients humbly request to have the decision from the director, that can be made within seven court days.”
State advocate George Baloyi said if a decision was communicated based on Mshololo’s request, it would inform Teffo if the final decision to decline to prosecute would kick in as requested.
Pretoria News