Court Awaits Key Ruling On Whether Sibiya Can Be Questioned Over Ntanzi’s Confession

The Pretoria High Court has postponed its decision on whether the state can question the first accused, Muzi Sibiya, about an alleged confession made by his co-accused in the Senzo Meyiwa murder trial. Judgment on the matter has been reserved until Monday.

The defence strongly objected to the state’s attempt to question Sibiya about a statement made by accused number two, Bongani Ntanzi, arguing that such evidence is inadmissible against another accused person.

Police investigations initially focused on two alleged intruders who entered the Khumalo family home in Vosloorus, but the case took a turn when Ntanzi allegedly confessed after his arrest in June 2020.

He reportedly made two confession statements detailing the alleged roles of each of the accused in what has been described as a contract killing of the Bafana Bafana captain.

Defence Argues Confession Cannot Be Used Against Co-Accused

The state has already presented evidence including Sibiya’s alleged admissions and the pointing out of the crime scene, but the defence objected when prosecutors sought to question him about Ntanzi’s statement.

Defence counsel Charles Mnisi told the court:

“Now, what is it that is before court, that the state says they want to cross-examine Mr Sibiya. These are the documents that they are saying. These are the statements that the state is saying are confessions that were made by Mr Ntanzi.

“Now the law with regards to the admissibility of confessions in respect of another person is by section 219 of the Criminal Procedure Act. And the position is very clear. A confession cannot be used against another accused person. The law is very clear.”

Ntanzi’s statement allegedly identified Sibiya as the lookout outside the Khumalo home while two intruders went inside. His lawyer, Sipho Ramosepele, maintained that any claim of a conspiracy must be proven in court.

Zithulele Nxumalo, representing accused four, Mthokoziseni Maphisa, also objected, saying:

“This is the attempt by the state to force open the door for the admission of such a statement as executive statements against the co-accused. And this will undermine the integrity of the court and should be discouraged at all costs.”

State Stands Firm on Its Evidence

Advocate Zandile Mshololo, representing accused five Fisokuhle Ntuli, argued that using Ntanzi’s statement would be unconstitutional.

“The state indicated that those statements were made under the provisions of Section 217 and 219 of the Criminal Procedure Act. And therefore, the exception that the state wants cannot and does not apply to the statements that are before the court. And they cannot be used against the co-accused. This is a constitutional, My Lord.”

However, state prosecutor George Baloyi insisted that the prosecution’s case rests not only on the confessions but also on corroborating witness testimony.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: RAF Expands Services To Rural KwaZulu-Natal To Improve Access And Road Safety

“The evidence of Constable Zungu shows that there was an association of the persons involved at the hostel, testified as to what happened before the departure of the accused, and also upon their return, how they followed one another.

“The pointing out and his own confession that the accused spells out the role that he played, said his role was that of a lookout. The evidence of the witnesses who testify that those were in the house, that they were in the house.”

The court is expected to deliver its decision on Monday, when the trial resumes.

---

For More, Follow SurgeZirc SA On  Facebook, X,  Instagram and Bluesky