By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The murder trial of former Bafana Bafana Captain Senzo Meyiwa resumed in the High Court in Pretoria on Monday morning, after two months recess.
The five men accused of the football star’s 2014 murder were in the dock where they face a litany of charges including murder and housebreaking.
Meyiwa was shot at the Vosloorus home of his girlfriend Kelly Khumalo in October 2014.
The trial is in a process of what’s called a trial within a trial where the admissibility of confession statements by two of the accused is being determined.
The lead investigator Bongani Gininda was on the witness stand, testifying on how two of the accused Bongani Ntanzi and Muzikawukhulelwa Sibiya’s confession statements were taken.
Gininda believes the Meyiwa was a victim of a contractual assassination rather than a robbery gone wrong.
During proceedings, Advocate Thulani Mngomezulu continued his cross-examination by quizzing the investigating officer about the J50 warrant of arrest issued for his clients, Ntanzi and Sibiya.
The warrants were issued on 23 October 2020 and were executed three days later.
He questioned Gininda why the application, along with the investigator’s supporting affidavit, filed by the state requesting the warrants to be issued was presented before the Boksburg Magistrate’s Court when Meyiwa was killed in Vosloorus.
While the witness agreed the crime was committed in Vosloorus, he said Boksburg Magistrate’s Court fell under the same jurisdiction.
“It will be trying to mislead this court in trying to create an impression that Boksburg doesn’t fall within the jurisdiction of Vosloorus and I think Mngomezulu knows that. Vosloorus is a district court and Boksburg you get the regional court within the district of that area. It’s one district so there is nothing peculiar or unlawful that was done, “Gininda said.
Mngomezulu, however, contended that the application was filed in the wrong court.
The defence lawyer argued that the warrant of arrest was issued unlawfully because Sibiya and Ntanzi were already in custody.
But Gininda said the accused had been detained for different cases.
“The warrant of arrest or the J50 is means of taking someone to court. It must not be misconstrued as a violation of the rights of the person that is being arrested.
“In any event, section 36 of the Constitution has limitation clause… once a case is made and the warrant is authorised what do you do? The person must appear in court and the warrant of arrest is the means of taking someone to court as it can be a summons or any other thing. I’m not aware of any provision in 43 [of the Criminal Procedure Act] that says if the person is in custody you cannot execute a warrant,” he said.
Gininda then proceeded to read out his affidavit in court which revealed that Meyiwa’s murder was a contract killing rather than the initial suspicion that it was a robbery gone wrong.
“Investigations which resulted in evidence under oath revealed that the victim was murdered as a contractual assassination or hit rather than a robbery or robbery gone wrong. Evidence revealed that suspects actively participated in the planning and execution of the contractual murder of Senzo Meyiwa,” the document reads.
The investigating officer’s affidavit also detailed the alleged role of each of the accused and how they were linked to the crime.
Sibiya, according to the affidavit, was linked to the crime by witness statements after he boasted to his close associates in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) about his alleged involvement along with his co-accused in Meyiwa’s killing.
His admissions were reported to the police by the close associates.
“The accused was further linked with circumstantial evidence wherein he, minutes after the incident, disclosed and made remarks at a family gathering that he attended in Vosloorus for the killing of Meyiwa even before the death was reported in the media.”
Watch Live in the video below:
Video Courtesy of ENCA.