On November 11, the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) trial continued for the first time without accused number one, IFP Councillor Mthembeni Majola, in the dock.
Following his death in August, the case continued in which Cllr Majola, former Endumeni Mayor Richard Mbatha and alleged hit-man Xolani Makhathini are charged with conspiracy to commit murder.
ALSO READ: IFP case: ‘ Assassin plot’ thickens as local mayor is named
Advocate Kay Augustine began by saying that “Mthembeni” translates to “in whom we trust”. She announced that people trusted the late Mthembeni and that she will clear his name.
In the same breath, she argued that the entrapment or undercover operation did not follow the guidelines of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Only after this did State Prosecutor Nel hand the guidelines to the court.
Advocate Augustine then commenced with a ‘trial within a trial’ based on this evidence.
After an adjournment, Magistrate Shoba explained to the court that the defence had raised the issue of admissibility, as it affects the accused’s rights.
NOW READ: Day 1 of the trial in the ‘IFP case’
State Prosecutor Nel called her witness, Investigating Officer (IO) Warrant Officer Milton Mandla Ndlovu, back to the witness box. He was once again sworn in and cross-examination continued, mainly focusing on the undercover operation.
The IO explained how he went about getting approval to go ahead with the operation. He revealed that in his application based on information given to him by the informant, he applied for the operation to take place in Estcourt and other areas.
The defence argued that ‘other areas’ is not sufficient and that he had no grounds to arrest the accused.
Advocate Augustine told the court that the accused had no previous convictions, whereas the informant has six charges against him, including robbery and murder.
The State objected to this, saying it is only speculation.
Most of Advocate Augustine’s arguments revolved around the verbal operation approval that was granted, and not written approval as stated in the guidelines, as well as when the operation changed from Estcourt to Dundee.
She also announced to court that the IO was fed lies by the informant, as the application was meant for a meeting held in Estcourt to reveal who would be assassinated, but the operation moved to Dundee and never made mention of accused number two, Mr Mbatha.
The case was adjourned, with the ‘trial within a trial’ being postponed to February 10 next year, when the advocate from the DPP (who granted the undercover operation) will testify.
ALSO READ: IFP Case: Cross questioning continued on day 2 of the trial
Click to receive news links via WhatsApp. Or for the latest news, visit our webpage or follow us on Facebook and Twitter
