Mafe was ‘threatened with death sentence’

Parliament arson accused claims members of the SAPS intimidated him after his arrest

IN HIS bid for bail and an early exit from a psychiatric hospital, Parliament arson accused Zandile Mafe has made damning allegations against the police – from intimidation and death threats to being forced to carry boxes from the scene of the crime.

Yesterday, advocate Dali Mpofu and attorney Luvuyo Godla filed a notice of motion for an urgent bail application at the Western Cape High Court, just two days after Mafe began a 30-day observation period at Valkenberg Psychiatric Hospital.

Outside court, a group of his supporters from the PAC of Azania and the Azanian People’s Organisation protested and called for Mafe’s release.

In their application, Mafe’s lawyers claim their client should never have been remanded in custody for seven days pending a bail hearing.

“An accused can only be remanded for seven days at a time, and our client now has to wait 30 days for a bail application outcome, due to him being sent to Valkenberg for observation. That is why we handed in the notice of motion for an urgent bail application.”

However, Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe said he first needed to address the defence’s arguments that Mafe’s referral to Valkenberg was illegal.

On Thursday, Magistrate Zamekile Mbalo signed the order to have Mafe referred for observation, following a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia by district surgeon Dr Zeland van Tonder.

Judge Hlophe said he was made aware that the referral had been challenged on the basis of it allegedly being unlawful and wrongful. However, he, as a single judge, could not overrule a competent ruling and would need input from another judge.

“The matter is of grave public importance, so we should stick to facts. The hearing regarding the challenge of referral will also pave the way to my decision about the notice of motion.”

The spokesperson for the National Prosecuting Authority, Eric Ntabazalila, said the order came after the State argued that the court had an obligation to send the accused for mental observation subsequent to a diagnosis and recommendation by a district surgeon.

Despite the urgent motion not being heard, a 16-page affidavit from Mafe revealed that the 40-year-old intended to deny all the charges against him.

Mafe faces charges of housebreaking with the intention to commit theft, arson, malicious injury to property and offences in terms of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy Against Terrorism and Related Activities Act.

“I am not a terrorist. I am an ordinary and destitute South African, like millions of fellow citizens. Like them, I am angry about conditions, but I am not violent. I am not insane,” the affidavit states.

Mafe also detailed the moments leading up to his arrest, stating that he was asleep in front of the Parliament precinct and was woken up by the police.

“Prior to my arrest, I had been sleeping outside the precinct of the building known as the South African Parliament and was woken up by members of the SAPS. I then noticed for the first time the Parliament building ablaze with black smoke escaping from the roof,” the document states.

“It is worth mentioning that at the time of my arrest I was violently manhandled and intimidated by the members of SAPS, who also dragged me into the precinct of the Parliament where I was given boxes to carry. I do not know what the contents of the boxes were.”

Mafe goes on to allege that he was then accused of causing the fire.

“I denied this. I was then taken to Cape Town Central police station. A few hours later, I was booked out by an unknown man and taken to an unknown place … At the place, an unknown white man told me that I would be sentenced to death for burning Parliament unless I co-operated with them. I was terrified and as a result I promised to ‘co-operate’ with whatever they may require of me.”

In his responding affidavit, State prosecutor Adrian Gelderblom said the matter should not have been brought before the High Court.

“Due to the extreme time constraints placed on the State to respond to the application, issues of a legal nature will be addressed and amplified at the hearing of the matter,” it states.

The notice of motion will be heard next Saturday, after Judge Hlophe meets with his colleague for the hearing of the challenge on Tuesday.