Tag Archives: Pilirani Masanjala

Norman Chisale cornered; State submits call logs to prove his interference with witness

Norman Chisale

State lawyers have submitted call logs to prove that Norman Chisale had been interfering with state witnesses in an attempted murder case which he is answering.

This is in support of an application the state made yesterday for revocation of bail of Chisale on allegation that the bodyguard of former president Peter Mutharika was interfering with witnesses.

One of state lawyers, Pilirani Masanjala, told the court that “it was not possible for the state to make the submission yesterday when making the application.”

“Looking at the urgency of the matter, state saw it wise to obtain logs which show that the accused indeed conferred with witnesses,” he said.

“We have filed today the call log of the witness and the accused. For this reason, we will be calling the witness to explain the document and why it is before the court,” Masanjala added.

Masanjala said the witness “will be called at the next date of hearing and that will be the close of the matter by the state.”

In his counter-argument, counsel Chancy Gondwe from the defense team told the court that the application is “embarrassing”.

“We will respond in form of submissions. We requested state to make formal application but they resisted. Had they made the formal application; we wouldn’t have been in this mess created by state by refusing to make formal application.

“They do not want the matter to come to an end. They want to find an exit out of this matter. Maybe they do not have faith in the evidence that they are bringing to the court. May be that could be the reason.

“They have to bring the call logs so that we interrogate what is in the call logs so that the court should be satisfied as to whether there were interferences; so, they should bring them so that we can examine them and see who was talking to who and what was the nature of discussion if at all,” he said.

Gondwe, who showed frustration with state, asked state before the court “to be serious” with the matter, calling the application “embarrassing”.

“Counsel Masanjala called me yesterday that they will parade two witnesses today and we were ready for that,” Gondwe said after Counsel Masanjala indicated that they were not parading any more witness for today.

Outside the courtroom, Masanjala told media that “seriousness cannot go beyond the state wanting the accused to stay in custody while we finish the matter.

“We want him to at least be in custody because we are taking what he did very seriously. We have a witness and the witness will give evidence on behalf of state.”

Earlier in court, Counsel Gondwe cross-examined Detective Henry Malange, In-Charge of CID at Soche Police Station, who testified on allegation that the accused was interfering with state witness, Moses Banda.

Judge Sylvester Kalembera has since adjourned the case to Friday morning.

Source: Zodiak

Justice Ministry defends President Mutharika’s decree

Pilirani Masanjala: Ministry of justice spokesperson

BLANTYRE-(MaraviPost)—Malawi Government, through the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional affairs has defended President Peter Mutharika’s declaration of national disaster amid covid-19 epidemic, saying the President acted within the law.

Last month, Mutharika declared a state of national disaster over the coronavirus pandemic. As part of measures under the declaration, Mutharika banned public gatherings, closed schools and imposed travel restrictions on foreigners.

But High Court Judge Kenyata Nyirenda, who recently attracted public outrage when he ordered the Department of Immigration not to deport four Chinese nationals upon their arrival in the country amidst the deadly covid-19 pandemic, faulted Mutharika for using archaic laws.

Nyirenda in a ruling delivered on Friday, suggested that Mutharika did not mention the law because citing the law would have placed the authorities between a hard place and a rock.

“On one hand, there is the route of section 45 of the Constitution with its strict conditions, which conditions include obtaining approval from the Defence and Security Committee of the National Assembly.

“On the other hand, resort could be had to the Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act which, as has already been observed is not only very much outdated (already raising the question of its compatibility with the Constitution) but its provisions are also not that useful,” said Nyirenda.

In response, Ministry of Justice and Constitutional affairs has defended Mutharika’s move saying the president’s decree was made in accordance with section 32 of the Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act (Cap. 33:05 of the Laws of Mala?i).

 “In making the Declaration, the President complied with section 32 of the Act and as required by that provision, caused the said declaration to be published in the Gazette as Government Notice No. 4 in the Malawi Gazette Supplement of 3rd April, 2020,” said Pilirani Masanjala, Ministry of Justice spokesperson, in a statement dated 6th April, 2020.

He added: “The declaration of a state of disaster under subsection (1) shall remain in force for a period of three months from the date specified in the declaration as the commencement date of the state of disaster, unless the President by notice in the Gazette, withdraws such declaration before the expiry of such period: Provided that the President may, from time to time, extend or further extend such period by not more than another three months and shall do so by notice in the Gazette, published before the expiry of such period or any such extension thereof.”

Masanjala added that the Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act does not stop the president, as head of State and Government, from announcing any extraordinary measures as necessary in order to protect persons affected or likely to be affected by the disaster so declared.

Covid-19 has affected the whole world, forcing some countries to impose very strict measures. China was the first country to register coronavirus cases.