News / National
Sikhala, Sithole to get papers from the State papers next week
07 Sep 2022 at 06:39hrs | Views
THE State yesterday told the regional magistrate that CCC legislators Job Sikhala and Godfrey Karakadzai Sithole will next week be given all the documents they want and need to prepare for their defence in the trial set for November 21 at the Harare Magistrates Court on charges of obstructing or defeating the course of justice.
The two, through their lawyers, are seeking for the two prosecutors handling the matter be found in contempt and held in custody until the papers are handed over, with the presiding regional magistrate due to make a decision on Friday on whether that should happen.
In the court yesterday, Mr Lancelot Mutsokoti, appearing for the State, told regional magistrate Mr Taurai Manwere that these documents would be handed over to Sikhala and Sithole on or before September 12.
There was a small delay because on perusal of the docket, the prosecution noticed that two witness statements needed some clarifications, which prompted the prosecution to return the docket to the police for further management.
Mr Mutsokoti made the undertaking after Sikhala and Sithole, through lawyers Ms Beatrice Mtetwa and Mr Jeremiah Bamu, requested that the prosecution team be held in contempt for failing to abide by a court order that compelled them to furnish the two with the documents.
Ms Mtetwa submitted that the prosecution team of Mr Mutsokiti and Mr Michael Reza be incarcerated for failing to abide by the order from regional magistrate Mrs Feresi Chakanyuka that the State furnish Sikhala and Sithole with the documents.
The two wrote letters to the State requesting for the documents as in the court order, but the prosecution did not respond.
In response, Mr Mutsokoti told the court that they were not in contempt of court as they do not harbour any intention of withholding the said papers. "For a contempt to arise there must be a wilful disobey to the orders of the caourt.
"That intention does not exist. It is not the desire of this prosecutor or any other prosecutor to withhold court papers, especially where court order exists. We categorically deny such allegations," he said.
Mr Mutsokoti said the State's intentions were to give Sikhala and Sithole a full set of papers for preparation of their trial but the need for two statements to be sorted out meant that the docket was sent back to police.
"The docket was therefore send back to police, that is why Mr Reza did not have the papers when they approached him. "We have contacted the police to recall the docket. I am advised that on or by 12 September, we should have at least given defence some of the State papers," he said.
Mr Mutsokoti told the court that the State also wanted to give Sikhala and Sithole the court papers according to what the law stipulates. The law says an accused should be given the documents to prepare for trial at least two days before the hearing date.
"On the previous remand, we argued that the service of State papers is provided for in our law.
"The latest that we can serve the accused is two court days before the trial, with weekend and public holidays excluded. This is why according to their conversation with Mr Reza, which did not occur in the face of the court, it was said that they will be advised when they will be served with papers in accordance with the law.
"We will simply adhere to the law. We are not denying them State papers. Those will be served," he said.
In her submissions, Ms Mtetwa said:
"There is no compliance with court order and the State is in contempt.
"The court must protect its orders by showing that its orders are followed.
"Mr Reza and Mr Mutsokoti must be placed in custody until papers are provided, so that prosecution understands that the powers they wield are constitutional and they prosecute on our behalf and that they do not be abused.
"We want the court to do away with perception that whatever they want, they get it even where the prosecutor questions the very powers of the court.
"Messrs Reza and Mutsokoti since August 18 has failed to comply with the court order," he said.
Ms Mtetwa said the State was supposed to respond to their letters or appeal against magistrate Mrs Chakanyuka's order.
Mr Manwere is expected to decide on whether the State was in contempt on Friday.
The two, through their lawyers, are seeking for the two prosecutors handling the matter be found in contempt and held in custody until the papers are handed over, with the presiding regional magistrate due to make a decision on Friday on whether that should happen.
In the court yesterday, Mr Lancelot Mutsokoti, appearing for the State, told regional magistrate Mr Taurai Manwere that these documents would be handed over to Sikhala and Sithole on or before September 12.
There was a small delay because on perusal of the docket, the prosecution noticed that two witness statements needed some clarifications, which prompted the prosecution to return the docket to the police for further management.
Mr Mutsokoti made the undertaking after Sikhala and Sithole, through lawyers Ms Beatrice Mtetwa and Mr Jeremiah Bamu, requested that the prosecution team be held in contempt for failing to abide by a court order that compelled them to furnish the two with the documents.
Ms Mtetwa submitted that the prosecution team of Mr Mutsokiti and Mr Michael Reza be incarcerated for failing to abide by the order from regional magistrate Mrs Feresi Chakanyuka that the State furnish Sikhala and Sithole with the documents.
The two wrote letters to the State requesting for the documents as in the court order, but the prosecution did not respond.
In response, Mr Mutsokoti told the court that they were not in contempt of court as they do not harbour any intention of withholding the said papers. "For a contempt to arise there must be a wilful disobey to the orders of the caourt.
"That intention does not exist. It is not the desire of this prosecutor or any other prosecutor to withhold court papers, especially where court order exists. We categorically deny such allegations," he said.
Mr Mutsokoti said the State's intentions were to give Sikhala and Sithole a full set of papers for preparation of their trial but the need for two statements to be sorted out meant that the docket was sent back to police.
"The docket was therefore send back to police, that is why Mr Reza did not have the papers when they approached him. "We have contacted the police to recall the docket. I am advised that on or by 12 September, we should have at least given defence some of the State papers," he said.
"On the previous remand, we argued that the service of State papers is provided for in our law.
"The latest that we can serve the accused is two court days before the trial, with weekend and public holidays excluded. This is why according to their conversation with Mr Reza, which did not occur in the face of the court, it was said that they will be advised when they will be served with papers in accordance with the law.
"We will simply adhere to the law. We are not denying them State papers. Those will be served," he said.
In her submissions, Ms Mtetwa said:
"There is no compliance with court order and the State is in contempt.
"The court must protect its orders by showing that its orders are followed.
"Mr Reza and Mr Mutsokoti must be placed in custody until papers are provided, so that prosecution understands that the powers they wield are constitutional and they prosecute on our behalf and that they do not be abused.
"We want the court to do away with perception that whatever they want, they get it even where the prosecutor questions the very powers of the court.
"Messrs Reza and Mutsokoti since August 18 has failed to comply with the court order," he said.
Ms Mtetwa said the State was supposed to respond to their letters or appeal against magistrate Mrs Chakanyuka's order.
Mr Manwere is expected to decide on whether the State was in contempt on Friday.
Source - The Herald
