GIVE US BAIL, STATE IS NOT READY TO PROSECUTE – MUNDUBILE.
BRIAN Mundubile, Makebi Zulu and 16 others have asked the High Court to release them on constitutional bail, arguing that the State has admitted to prolonging their detention by continuing investigations after charging them with treason.
The 18 accused argue that the State cannot use ongoing investigations as an excuse to keep them in custody indefinitely without trial.
They say the State’s admission that investigations are still underway shows that it is not ready to prosecute them and that their continued detention violates their constitutional rights.
The petitioners, who are facing treason charges, have sued Attorney General Mulilo Kabesha over alleged violations of their constitutional rights while in custody.
The accused were arrested over allegations that they possessed high-grade military weapons intended to threaten State security.
In their reply to the State’s submissions, Mundubile and the other petitioners argued that it was apparent that investigations into all the charges had not been concluded despite their formal arrest.
“On the issue of the State stating that it was still coordinating a multi-agency intelligence operation involving 18 co-accused individuals charged with treason and terrorism, we submit that the above argument by the State patently shows that the State admits that the pretrial detention of the applicants is prolonged but aims to justify that it is not unreasonable to conduct lengthy investigations by mentioning the number of co-accused and that it is a multi-agency operation. It is a fact that the investigations have not been concluded even after the formal arrest and charging of the applicants. This speaks to the unreasonable delay envisaged in the case of Chetankumar Shantkal Parkh,” they stated.
“Further, the State has not addressed the pretrial delay in each of the separate charges but has rather relied on a universal excuse for all the charges. We urge the court to note that it is apparent that investigations into all charges have not been concluded. This is evidence that there is a delay occasioned by the State in the investigations, which cannot be used as an excuse to keep the applicants in custody without trial for an indefinite period. Otherwise, this excuse will conveniently be used to evade the provisions of the Constitution and make it ineffective”.
Mundubile and the others further stated that the State’s admission that it was still investigating the matter showed a clear and unreasonable delay in the proceedings.
“The State’s submission shows that it admits that the pretrial detention of the applicants is prolonged but aims to justify that it is not unreasonable to conduct lengthy investigations by mentioning the number of co-accused and that it is a multi-agency operation. The circumstances in this case are different from those in the Shamwana case, which the State relied upon, and the case does not create an automatic entitlement to detain accused persons for a lengthy period. It did not establish that any detention below a period of seven months is necessarily reasonable. It is our fervent submission that the Shamwana case does not aid the State’s case. The admission that the State is still investigating this matter shows a clear and unreasonable delay in the proceedings and, as such, justifies the court’s discretion to grant constitutional bail to the applicants,” stated Mundubile and the others.
“In conclusion, we submit that the Shamwana case should not be used or presented as prescribing a fixed period and therefore making the detention excusable. Similarly, a multi-agency operation and the number of co-accused should not be used by the State to justify investigations and delayed pretrial detention. Instead, this admission should be seen as an unconstitutional delay that entitles the applicants to constitutional bail.
We accordingly pray that this court grants the applicants constitutional bail based on the admission by the State that they are not ready to prosecute the cases owing to ongoing investigations.
The applicants accordingly reiterate the prayer that this Honourable Court order their release on constitutional bail and impose reasonable conditions as are necessary to secure attendance and protect the integrity of the proceedings, and grant such further relief as the court considers just”.
Credit: News Diggers