SA court gives State Jan deadline in Bushiri case
The Pretoria Magistrate’s Court in South Africa has given prosecution until January 25 2023 to finalise investigations in the State’s fraud case against Prophet Shepherd Bushiri or risk having the case struck out.
The court gave the deadline on Tuesday after the State asked for an adjournment and warned that if investigations are not completed by then, the 102 million rand case would be dismissed.
Bushiri’s co-accused Willah Mudolo and his wife, Zethu as well as Landiwe Ntlokwana, Nomalarvasagie Reddy and Sateesh Isseri were present in court.
Bushiri and his wife Mary are answering the criminal charges in that country where they fled from in November 2020 while on bail and South African authorities are seeking their extradition from Malawi to face trial.
According to South African Online publication, News 24, Mudolo and his wife had asked the court in November last year to hold an inquiry on why the proceedings were delaying, but the court found no reasonable delays after going through submissions by the State.
In an interview yesterday, Bushiri’s spokesperson Ephraim Nyondo said the Bushiris were closely following the court case in South Africa.
He said: “The court decision means exactly what Bushiri has been complaining with regards to how he was being victimised in South Africa, the reason he left and returned home in Malawi.
“How do you explain a situation where you arrest a person and four years later you can’t try that person because you are still investigating?”
In February this year, High Court of Malawi Judge Redson Kapindu provided direction to the ongoing extradition case, saying it is at the discretion of the magistrate’s court to determine whether the trial can be heard virtually, with witnesses testifying remotely, or to have witnesses physically in court.
The matter is being heard by former Lilongwe chief resident magistrate’s Patrick Chirwa, now a High Court of Malawi judge, who ordered that witnesses from South Africa must come physically to testify as there is no law that supports virtual witness testimony.
The State applied to the High Court to seek clarity on the matter, and in his ruling, Kapindu, said there is enough judicial precedent that points to the fact that trial can be held virtually.
