Chadema chief lawyer Tundu Lissu (left) talks to party chairman Freeman Mbowe at the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in Dar es Salaam yesterday evening. Mr Lissu was charged with three counts, including sedition and contempt of court. He was released on bail of Sh10 million. PHOTO | SAID KHAMIS
What you need to know:
The prosecution was against Mr Kibatala representing Lissu on grounds that they had drafted the lawyer as one of their witnesses
Dar es Salaam. A fierce legal wrangle characterised a seditious case facing Singida east Member of Parliament Tundu Lissu at the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in th city yesterday.
The arguments caused the delay of the proceedings after the prosecution and the defence teams argued about the involvement in the case of Mr Peter Kibatala, one of the lawyers Mr Lissu included in his defence team.
During the argument, four people, believed to be Chadema members who thronged Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court to hear the case, were arrested for allegedly causing unnecessary commotion at the court premises.
Mr Lissu was brought to the court at around 02.50pm under heavy security. The court premises were also under heavy security since morning well before Mr Lissu was brought.
At a little over 03.30pm, Lissu was brought into the courtroom, but a legal battle erupted before the charges were read against him. The prosecution, led by Principal state attorney Faraja Nchimbi, was against Mr Kibatala representing Lissu on grounds that they had drafted the lawyer as one of their witnesses.
The prosecution questioned the legality of Mr Kibatala representing the accused because he (Mr Kibatala) was already questioned by the prosecution as one of its witnesses.
The prosecution argued further that they had listed Mr Kibatala as their witness as he was present when the accused allegedly issued the seditious statement.
Mr Kibatala leads a group of nine lawyers defending Lissu in the case.
But the private lawyer countered the prosecution’s arguments, telling the court that the law does not bar him from representing his customer.
This forced the Principal Resident Magistrate, Cyprian Mkeha, to temporarily adjourn the case in order to give him and the two sides privacy to iron out their differences over the issue.
After the resumption of the court session, the magistrate advised the prosecution to read the charges first as he could not issue any ruling without formal charges being brought before the court.
However, the prosecution refused to do so, pressing that Mr Kibatala’s be struck off the list of lawyers representing Lissu.
The magistrate adjourned the case for the second time to give the prosecution time to look into the issue deeply and after the court resumed after half an hour, three charges were read against Lissu.
Lissu was charged of issuing seditious remarks as well as contempt of court, charges which he denied. After the charges were read, an argument centred on Mr Kibatala started afresh. Mr Kibatala raised preliminary objections on the prosecution’s application that his name be removed from the defence lawyers’ list.
In his objection, Mr Kibatala argued that the court had no power to disqualify him or force him to withdraw because the court had not seen the statement which he recorded at the police station.
