Mhlanga Denied Bail in High-Profile Incitement Case

By A Correspondent | In a closely watched legal battle, Magistrate Farai Gwatima today ruled against granting bail to the accused, Mhlanga, citing compelling reasons provided by the prosecution. The magistrate emphasized that the prosecution’s responsibility in bail applications is to demonstrate the existence of compelling reasons why the accused should not be released.

Gwatima praised both the State and defense for their exemplary conduct during the proceedings, describing their behavior as “refreshing and amazing.” He noted that this professionalism allowed the legal process to proceed smoothly without unnecessary legal obstacles.

State’s Arguments Against Bail

The prosecution, led by Ruvimbo Matyatya, argued that Mhlanga posed a significant risk of interfering with witnesses, many of whom are his juniors. Matyatya pointed out that some witness statements were yet to be recorded, increasing the likelihood of interference if Mhlanga were released.

Additionally, the State raised concerns that some of the machinery used in the alleged offense had not been recovered. There was a fear that Mhlanga could reoffend using the same tools if granted bail. However, the prosecution did acknowledge that Mhlanga had voluntarily surrendered to the police and had not attempted to flee.

Defense’s Counterarguments Rejected

The defense, led by Mhike, argued that the prosecution’s submissions lacked merit. He noted that the witnesses’ identities were not disclosed and denied allegations that Mhlanga had incited violence.

Despite these arguments, Magistrate Gwatima upheld the State’s position. He stated, “What is an issue is not that the applicant gathered and disseminated information. It is that the information which he gathered was intended to incite public violence.”

Balancing Constitutional Rights and Public Safety

In his ruling, Gwatima stressed the delicate balance between upholding constitutional rights and maintaining public safety. “The admission to bail has been elevated to a constitutional right. But our Constitution is not novel,” he remarked, adding that the right to bail is not absolute.

He warned against denying bail on “flimsy reasons” but noted that the court must weigh the interests of the accused against potential risks to public safety and the administration of justice. “It is a delicate discretion,” he said, emphasizing the need for strong evidence to support claims that an accused might abscond or interfere with investigations.

Key Reasons for Bail Denial

The magistrate identified specific concerns in this case, particularly Mhlanga’s position at work, which could enable him to interfere with witnesses. The fact that some witnesses had not yet retired from their roles added to the risk that investigations could be jeopardized.

Gwatima concluded, “What clearly emerges is that the disseminated message will incite violence. Any interpretation to the contrary is incorrect. Accordingly, the release of the accused will put the nation in unrest and undermine peace and security.”

Conclusion: Bail Denied

In light of the compelling reasons presented by the State, Magistrate Gwatima ruled that Mhlanga’s continued detention was justified. “Accordingly, bail is denied,” he declared, bringing the intense courtroom drama to a close.

This ruling is expected to generate significant public discourse, with implications for how future bail applications involving allegations of incitement and public safety risks are handled.

More updates to follow as the story develops.