Chinhengo to entertain Shanghala’s trial-separation application
Yesterday, Windhoek High Court judge Moses Chinhengo announced that he plans to promptly address an application for a separate trial filed by former justice minister Sacky Shanghala and his co-accused in the Fishrot trial, James Hatukulipi and Pius Mwatelulo.
State advocate Ed Marondedze argued that the application was premature and should only be considered after the remaining accused had entered their pleas. He also expressed concerns that if the court dismissed the application, it could lead to Shanghala filing another, further delaying the main trial.
In response, Chinghengo said it was the court's prerogative to decide on the matter. He added that if Shanghala were to submit another application, he would entertain it regardless.
Delayed
The criminal trial and plea-taking proceedings that were scheduled to continue at the beginning of this week were delayed due to the hospitalisation of Ricardo Gustavo.
He reportedly illegally profited N$22.5 million through his involvement in the matter via the fishing company Namgomar.
Gustavo, who is reportedly battling congestive heart failure, was discharged from hospital yesterday and is expected to be in court today.
Unresolved
Representing Hatuikulipi, Mbanga Siyomunji argued against proceeding with the main trial while pending interlocutory applications brought by Shanghala remain unresolved. He told the court that these applications should be addressed first before moving forward with the main trial and plea-taking.
"This is in line with common law, which dictates that one matter should be resolved before proceeding with another," he said.
Chinhengo, however, reminded Siyomunji that no law mandates a main trial to come to a complete halt due to pending interlocutory applications. The judge further challenged Siyomunji to direct him to such a law - if it exists. "All this is a question of prudence and convenience, but I am persuaded enough that it does not warrant a halt.”
In legal practice, whether a trial should be paused due to interlocutory applications is typically left to the discretion of the presiding judge. The judge will consider factors such as the relevance and impact of the applications on the main trial. Some interlocutory matters may need to be resolved before the main trial can proceed, while others might be dealt with concurrently.
State advocate Ed Marondedze argued that the application was premature and should only be considered after the remaining accused had entered their pleas. He also expressed concerns that if the court dismissed the application, it could lead to Shanghala filing another, further delaying the main trial.
In response, Chinghengo said it was the court's prerogative to decide on the matter. He added that if Shanghala were to submit another application, he would entertain it regardless.
Delayed
The criminal trial and plea-taking proceedings that were scheduled to continue at the beginning of this week were delayed due to the hospitalisation of Ricardo Gustavo.
He reportedly illegally profited N$22.5 million through his involvement in the matter via the fishing company Namgomar.
Gustavo, who is reportedly battling congestive heart failure, was discharged from hospital yesterday and is expected to be in court today.
Unresolved
Representing Hatuikulipi, Mbanga Siyomunji argued against proceeding with the main trial while pending interlocutory applications brought by Shanghala remain unresolved. He told the court that these applications should be addressed first before moving forward with the main trial and plea-taking.
"This is in line with common law, which dictates that one matter should be resolved before proceeding with another," he said.
Chinhengo, however, reminded Siyomunji that no law mandates a main trial to come to a complete halt due to pending interlocutory applications. The judge further challenged Siyomunji to direct him to such a law - if it exists. "All this is a question of prudence and convenience, but I am persuaded enough that it does not warrant a halt.”
In legal practice, whether a trial should be paused due to interlocutory applications is typically left to the discretion of the presiding judge. The judge will consider factors such as the relevance and impact of the applications on the main trial. Some interlocutory matters may need to be resolved before the main trial can proceed, while others might be dealt with concurrently.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article