CCC members Job Sikhala and Godfrey Sithole, charged with obstructing the course of justice, yesterday lost their latest bail bid, based on what they argued were changed circumstances, after a Harare magistrate dismissed their application saying nothing essential had changed since their initial court appearance.
Harare regional magistrate Mrs Feresi Chakanyuka dismissed
the application after noting that there were no changed circumstances from June
17 when they first made a bail application which was turned down.
Sikhala and Sithole, through their lawyers Mr Jeremiah Bamu
and Ms Beatrice Mtetwa, had mounted a fresh bail bid based on the passage of
time and the fact that Sikhala had not been posting videos. ZimLive, an online
news portal, had written a letter confirming that Sikhala had not posted a
video on the online platform.
The two had also told the court that there were other
people who were arrested for causing the violence that occurred in Nyatsime
following the killing of Moreblessing Ali, whom they said supported their
party.
The area was flooded with rumours that she went missing in
a political attack, but it was found later that she had been grabbed and killed
by a former boyfriend.
In their application, they had argued that some owners of
the trucks that the State alleges were hired by Sithole were also arrested in
connection with the violence.
The State led by Mr Lancelot Mutsokoti had opposed the
application saying there was nothing that was placed before the court that
warrants them to be released on bail.
In her ruling, Mrs Chakanyuka dismissed the application and
the letter which Sikhala and Sithole said was written by ZimLive.
Mrs Chakanyuka said it was impossible for the court to make
a finding on a document that was not placed before it.
“The court cannot make a finding on a document that is in
the air,” she said.
Mrs Chakanyuka said the fact that there are other suspects
arrested in connection with the same incident was not ample ground that
warrants Sikhala and Sithole to be granted bail.
“It is the court’s view that those arguments do not amount
to an exceptional circumstance because it does not work in favour of the
applicants,” she said.
Mr Mutsokoti then applied that the two return to court on
August 29 while waiting for their trial scheduled for November 15.
Mr Bamu opposed the application demanding that they be
remanded straight to the trial date, which should be within 14 days.
He argued that the November 15 date was too far, claiming
that it was in violation of their constitutional right to be tried within the
shortest possible time.
In reply, Mr Mutsokoti said the trial date does not violate
the two’s constitutional rights.
The court ordered Sikhala and Sithole to return to court
today for ruling on Mr Bamu’s opposing submissions. Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment