From the onset of the Senzo Meyiwa trial in April, it became clear that its proceedings were to be, at best, precarious.
In recent weeks we have witnessed several exchanges between the legal representative for accused one to four, controversial advocate Malesela Teffo, and judge Tshifhiwa Maumela.
At times these exchanges were between Teffo and fellow defence advocate Zandile Mshololo, representing accused number five, as well as with state prosecutor Adv George Baloyi.
While it is common cause that any trial may have moments of tension between the parties, the level we have observed in this case, in particular between Teffo and the judge, is unacceptable and undermines the decorum of the court.
Much of the blame must be placed squarely on Teffo whose conduct as an officer of the court has left much to be desired.
From swearing in court, the abrasive manner in which he raises his concerns and his insistence on being allowed to deviate from established procedural norm, Teffo appears to have positioned himself as somewhat of an agitator in these proceedings.
In recent days Teffo has raised a series of objections during Mshololo’s cross-examination of the first state witness, pointing to issues that ultimately question the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter and further claiming that his clients’ constitutional rights had been undermined.
While Teffo has every right to question the procedure and merits of the case, the manner in which he has done it so far is problematic and risks undermining the integrity of the court.
We must emphasise that at issue here is not the content of his arguments or submissions. The legitimacy and legal standing of his submissions are for the court to determine.
The problem is his conduct. Her appears to always demand his way, regardless of the rulings of the court.
Visibly frustrated on Monday, Maumela slammed Teffo’s conduct, saying: “Disrespect, to him, is when after being warned by the court several times, he insists on issues that the court has already given a ruling on. If you don’t grant him his way, then he sees that as disrespect.”
This conduct is unacceptable and unbecoming of a legal practitioner.
Under no circumstances must it be allowed.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.