News / National
CCC activists clock month in detention
16 Jul 2024 at 16:33hrs | Views
High Court Judge Justice Munamato Mutevedzi has reserved his ruling on the bail appeal of 78 opposition members arrested on June 16 for alleged unlawful gathering and disorderly conduct. The ruling is expected by July 18.
The appellants, including Senator Jameson Timba, argued that the lower court erred in not distinguishing their individual circumstances. Their lawyer, Jeremiah Bamu, emphasized that not all appellants participated in the alleged gathering, and some, like Lucia Antonio, were merely tenants at Timba's residence. Bamu criticized the "dragnet arrest" and argued that the personal circumstances, such as disability or injuries, were not adequately considered in denying bail.
Another lawyer, Webster Jiti, echoed these sentiments, asserting that there was no evidence the appellants would evade bail or interfere with witnesses. He criticized the court's decision based on alleged potential accomplices without specific evidence.
In response, Charles Muchemwa, representing the state, defended the lower court's decision, citing aggravating circumstances and a likelihood of conviction. He argued against bail for all appellants, including the disabled 40th appellant, stating that disability should not exempt someone from legal consequences.
Judge Mutevedzi concluded by reserving his judgment promptly, stating it would be delivered no later than Thursday, emphasizing the importance of the case and the need for swift resolution.
The appellants, including Senator Jameson Timba, argued that the lower court erred in not distinguishing their individual circumstances. Their lawyer, Jeremiah Bamu, emphasized that not all appellants participated in the alleged gathering, and some, like Lucia Antonio, were merely tenants at Timba's residence. Bamu criticized the "dragnet arrest" and argued that the personal circumstances, such as disability or injuries, were not adequately considered in denying bail.
Another lawyer, Webster Jiti, echoed these sentiments, asserting that there was no evidence the appellants would evade bail or interfere with witnesses. He criticized the court's decision based on alleged potential accomplices without specific evidence.
In response, Charles Muchemwa, representing the state, defended the lower court's decision, citing aggravating circumstances and a likelihood of conviction. He argued against bail for all appellants, including the disabled 40th appellant, stating that disability should not exempt someone from legal consequences.
Judge Mutevedzi concluded by reserving his judgment promptly, stating it would be delivered no later than Thursday, emphasizing the importance of the case and the need for swift resolution.
Source - newzimbabwe
