[ad_1]
421
Morosi Zian
High Court Judge Charles Hungwehaveharshly criticized the lawyer representing a soldier facing charges of attempted murder and malicious damage to propertyIn one of the high-profile cases he heard.
Lawyer Thapelo Ntsiki represents Heqoa Malefane, who is charged along with former army commanders Tlali Kamoli, Pitso Ramoepane, Litekanyo Nyakane and Mohlalefi Seitlheko. The charges relate to the simultaneous bombings on January 27, 2014 of the Moshoeshoe II residence of former first lady Maesaiah Thabane and the Ha-Abia residence of then police commissioner Khothatso Tshoana.
Yesterday, the case was due to go to court in Ntsiki’s absence. Limakatso Mokhatholane, who represented Ntsiki, informed the court that Ntsiki would withdraw from the case.
“Adv Ntsiki inherited the case from the late lawyer (Hopolang) Nathane, who later became a judge. Upon Judge Nathane’s death, the will stated that his estate was to be managed by his wife, who was named as the executor. Adv Ntsiki was unable to access the case files because they were in the hands of the Bar,” explained Adv Mokhatholane.
Justice Hengwe adjourned the court for 30 minutes after asking Nziki to appear to explain himself. Upon his return, Nziki confirmed Mokatolane’s claims, adding that he had ceased to practice law.
“I was appointed caretaker of Nathane Chambers and have been managing his business since 2022 to complete outstanding matters. After Nathane’s death, his will named his wife as executor and provided for the Law Society to manage the business. We filed documents with the Law Society, including that of the defendant. The Law Society intends to contact clients directly regarding representation. We are unable to communicate directly with clients in prison and can only pass on messages through contacts. As of October 2023, I am no longer a practising lawyer,” said Adv Ntsiki.
Justice Hungwe was not impressed and claimed that Adv Ntsiki should have informed his client and informed the Bar Association of the development.
“You had an obligation to hand over your work when you left practice. Informing your clients and advising the Law Society was essential. The will should not have interfered with your duties. You failed to ensure that the cases proceeded smoothly and did not formally quit. Your actions led to this situation, not the will,” Judge Hengway said.
Prosecutor Adv Rethabile Setlojoane recommended that the case continue to be heardsTogether with Adv Raboloetsi Makara, initially as an observer lawyer, taking notes and reporting to Malefane’s new lawyersOnce appointed.
However, other defence lawyers disagreed, pointing out that Adv Makara was involved with the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Adv Letuka Molati, who represented Kamoli, argued that Adv Makara was disqualified because of his work for the DPP.
“Adv Makara handles the DPP’s brief. I am not comfortable defending with him. He is not qualified to be a defence lawyer when prosecuting certain cases,” Adv Molati argued.
Defense attorney Kabelo Letuka agreed, saying: “It would be a detriment to the client to hire a lawyer who has not consulted the client. It was a dereliction of duty for defense attorney Makara to represent the client without consulting him.”
Adv Makara denied receiving a brief from the DPP and said he was ready to take over and consult with clients.
“I have not received a brief from the DPP. I am prepared to proceed and will consult with the client,” Adv Makara insisted.
Justice Hungwe released Adv Ntsiki from the case and adjourned the case until today (Thursday).
“I will release lawyer Ntsiki and allow lawyer Makara to represent the accused. The case will be heard tomorrow,” Justice Hungwe announced.
[ad_2]
Source link
