A supporter warns a colleague over exchange of words with a riot commander at the court yesterday.
Investigation into the case facing Sheikh Issa Ponda and others has been completed, the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court was informed by the prosecution yesterday.
Ponda (54) and 49 others are prime suspects in five criminal counts including stealing of property worth up to 59m/- and inciting the commission of an offence.
The case was brought up for mention yesterday with the prosecution led by principal state Attorney Tumaini Kweka informing the court that the investigations into the case are complete and requested the court for a preliminary hearing date.
Resident Magistrate Victoria Nongwa setting the bail, instructed the accused to present one surety each to sign a bond of one million shillings while a second condition was that the accused not visit the crime scene until judgment is passed.
The bail privilege was however not extended to Ponda while the other accused failed to meet the terms and were remanded in custody. Ponda was denied bail because apparently the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) filed a ‘certificate of urgency’ to expedite the proceedings, which the court has no power to overturn.
The accused appeared at the Kisutu magistrate court ground around 7:00 in the morning under heavy guard. The court house perimeter was ringed with prison cars packed with fully armed askaris.
On top of that, there was foot patrol police, horse riot police, the Field Force Unit (FFU) as well as plain cloth policemen.
Apart from journalists, who were screened through metal detectors, the proceedings were behind closed doors and security cameras were installed to keep an extra eye on the numerous onlookers. Only other persons allowed into the court premises were the employees. All proceedings were supervised by government security officers.
Background on the Ponda case has it that, in Dar es Salaam, on October 12th last month, the 50 accused did willingly and in good conscious, conspire to commit offences contrary to section 386 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA).
They are also accused of, in a violent manner, trespassing the land that is the lawful property of the Agritanza Company this contrary to section 86 and 35 of the CPA cap 16 revised 2002. The case was adjourned until November 15th this year, when it comes up for preliminary hearing.
SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN
