FORMER MPS’ ADVOCATE: WE’RE GOING TO APPEAL

MBABANE – “We are going to exercise our right to appeal.”

Advocate Jacobus Van Vuuren, who represents former Members of Parliament (MPs) Mduduzi Bacede Mabuza and Mthandeni Dube, said they were aware of their right to appeal and they would exercise it. This is one of the submissions made by Van Vuuren on behalf of the former MPs, when they were making submissions on sentencing on Tuesday. Judge Mumcy Dlamini will sentence them on a date to be announced by the registrar of the High Court. Van Vuuren said sentencing was the most difficult part of a trial. He pleaded with the court not to focus so much on the crime, but on the accused persons and their circumstances, such as their age, whether they are married, they have children, employment and the reasons for the offences they were convicted of. “At this stage, forget about the conviction and focus on the issues of sentence. In doing so, we urge you to reflect dispassionately and focus on the accused persons. They are also citizens at the end of the day. It is a strange and peculiar case. When we are making submissions, we are not attacking the court per se. That we are not going to do. It is a challenge for you. I just want Her Ladyship to know where we are coming from,” said the advocate.

Judge Dlamini said: “Rest assured on that one.” Advocate Van Vuuren told the court that from their standpoint, it was difficult to address the court in a meaningful manner. "We are saying this with great respect, by virtue of the fact that it is difficult for us to address you properly, because you convicted the accused persons both in the main and alternative charges. We are saying this is creating a legal conundrum for us. We do respect you. We have been appearing before you for a long time. We know that we have the right to appeal and we are going to exercise that right. We are saying with great respect, the court committed a grave error there, making it difficult for us to address you pertinently on those issues,” said the advocate.

He also submitted that an accused person could not be convicted on both the main and alternative charges. The advocate said it was either one or the other. He pointed out that the Crown did not ask the court to convict on the main charge and its alternative. “On that score, the Crown didn’t ask the court to convict the accused on the main and alternative counts. It is clear from the section of the law that you go for the main, if not, then the alternative.” He said imposing a sentence on the main and two alternative charges was unfair. According to the advocate, they counsel were duty bound to assist the court in coming to a judicious sentence. “We are not here to say do what we want. We want to assist you as much as we can do,” said Van Vuuren.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: