By Mercy Matonga;
The Lilongwe Magistrate Court Wednesday adjourned the hearing of the extradition case involving Enlightened Christian Gathering (ECG) Church leader Prophet Shepherd Bushiri and wife Mary to May 16 this year.
The extradition case entered into the cross-examination stage on Monday, when lawyer for the defence took to task State witness Siyabonga Mnzinyathi, who is also the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in South Africa.
Speaking to journalists after the adjournment, defence lawyer Wapona Kita said the case was adjourned for them to scrutinise the evidence submitted by the State.
- Advertisement -
“After assessment of the evidence, we believe we need more time to complete the cross-examination. We were supposed to complete the cross-examination today but we think we need at least two days and we can’t get those days this week.
- Advertisement -
“At the same time, the State is busy with other cases and May is when both sides will be available to continue the case,” Kita said.
On his part, lawyer for the State, Dzikondianthu Malunda, said they were prepared for the continuation of hearing but that the defence asked for ample time to look into the evidence that they submitted.
“The defence wants to examine the documents and, for that reason, we were supposed to start later. When we came [to the court], we realised that the time left will not be enough for the defence to conclude the cross-examination and, as such, we agreed that we adjourn [the case] to a later day so that when we come back, they can conclude their cross-examination and [allow] us, the State, to do our re-examination,” Malunda said.
On Tuesday, the defence team pinned down Mnzinyathi, who is also DPP in Gauteng Province, South Africa, on why the other initial six witnesses did not come for the case.
- Advertisement -
But Kita also argued that only three out of the 13 offences against the Bushiris are extraditable.
The highlight of the hearing this week involved lawyers for the Bushiris questioning the State witness on issues such as whether cases for which South Africa wants to extradite the Bushiris are covered in Malawi’s Extradition Act.
On the second day of cross-examination, Kita asked Mnzinyathi to crosscheck if 13 of the offences fall under Section 5 of Malawi’s Extradition Act.
According to Kita, out of the 13 cases, only three offences fall under Section 5 of Malawi’s Extradition Act.
According to Kita, out of the multiple accounts the Bushiris are facing in South Africa, only three accounts of rape, forgery and theft were in line with Malawi’s Extradition Act.
Kita also asked Mnzinyathi to explain to the court if the South African authorities were through with investigations in relation to R106 million which the Bushiris are alleged to have stolen.
The witness could not confirm this.
The initial stages of cross-examination have primarily focused on whether the South African and Malawian authorities followed right procedures in arresting and seeking to extradite the Bushiris, who were arrested in South Africa but escaped to Malawi while they were on bail.
The Bushiris are wanted by Pretoria to answer multiple charges of theft, fraud and rape.
