ADVOCATE SAYS THERE IS NO CASE AGAINST MP'S
Advocates hired from South Africa to prosecute the two Members of Parliament Mthandeni Dube and Bacede Mabuza have written to the office of the Director of Public Prosecution alerting them that there is no case against the two. In a private correspondence between Pietermaritzburg based Advocate, Gareth Leppan, directed to the country’s DPP Sandile Dlamini, concedes that the state has no case against the two and that if at all they have to continue with the case the state would have to start afresh investigations.
In a private correspondence between Pietermaritzburg based Advocate, Gareth Leppan, directed to the country’s DPP Sandile Dlamimi, concedes that the state has no case against the two and that if at all they have to continue with the case the state would have to start afresh investigations.
This is obviously at odds with the established principle of the law that demands that police investigate to arrest not the other way around. Coming right after explosive details of the army Commander confirming that an irate King Mswati had ordered the arrest of the Two MP’s, doubts and speculation can now be cast aside about the two MP’s prosecution being a text book case of political prosecution if not persecution. The two MP’s were recently denied bail by Judge Mumcy Dlamini. Dlamini is wife to Supreme Court Judge Majahenkhaba Dlamini and a former Public Prosecutor.
The South African based advocate goes on a long detailed critique of the body of evidence presented by the DPP punching holes in various aspects of the evidence and asks of the prosecution to initiate fresh investigations or collect more evidence because as it stands the two cannot be prosecuted for any charge.
“A perusal of this memorandum may reveal an inordinate attention to detail but as the matter presently stands, we do not have any evidence that implicates the suspects, one or more, in any specific offence. Various offences relating to the actions and or words of the suspects come to mind, including sedition, treason, public violence, offences under the Suppression of Terrorism Act, incitement to commit said offences, refusal to obey police officers’ lawful command, and even, as discussed murder. However, as it stands, no one offense has its elements fully satisfied,” reads the memo now seen by The Bridge.
The Advocate asks of the DPP to get him evidence that links the suspects to the unrests or evidence that shows that the suspects encouraged the public to defy the government order or called for the public to do away with the government. The Advocate also shows worry about the manner in which the cellphones of the MP’s were confiscated and asks of the DPP to advice if this will not be challenged as the order to seize the phones was sought at the Magistrate Court and not the High Court.
*An earlier version of this story claimed the DPP was Sibusiso Gama. It has since been corrected.
NB: This story is the result of a joint effort between Swaziland News and The Bridge