- Debarred advocate Malesela Teffo appeared in court seeking to bring a public interest application on behalf of the five accused.
- Advocate Annelene van den Heever challenged his right to appear, saying he had no legal standing before the court.
- Judge William Karam ordered Teffo to produce documentary proof of his readmission before the application could proceed.
Proceedings in the attempted murder trial of Vusimuzi “Cat” Matlala and his co-accused were briefly interrupted in the High Court in Johannesburg when debarred advocate Malesela Teffo asked to address the court in what he described as a public interest application.
Teffo told the court he was appearing on behalf of the Teffo Foundation to raise alleged violations of the constitutional rights of the five accused. His attempt was immediately challenged by the defence, which argued that he had no standing to address the court.
Defence challenges Teffo’s standing
Appearing for Matlala, Advocate Annelene van den Heever told the court that valuable court time was being used while the State’s medical witness, who was only available that day, waited to testify.
She said the Legal Practice Council had already made it clear that Teffo had been struck from the roll and could not practise as an advocate.
“We are currently granting audience to somebody who has no standing in law to appear before you, speak to you, wear the gown of an advocate or pretend to be an advocate,” Van den Heever said.
Judge questions his legal status
Judge William Karam repeatedly asked Teffo whether he had been readmitted to the roll of advocates in the Gauteng Division.
Teffo replied that he was in good standing with the Gauteng Legal Practice Council and said he was originally admitted as an advocate on 5 January 2009. He said his only outstanding issue with the LPC was unpaid subscription fees.
Judge Karam, however, said the court was not concerned with Teffo’s original admission, but rather with whether he had ever been readmitted after being removed from the roll. “The court does not have all the necessary information at hand,” Judge William Karam said.
The judge also ruled that Teffo was appearing as an ordinary member of the public seeking audience, and that there was no substantive application properly before the court.
Court stands down the application
Judge Karam ordered that Teffo must first produce documentary evidence of his readmission by the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, before the court would consider his public interest application.
“It is hereby ordered that Mr Teffo, who is representing the Teffo Foundation and seeking to bring an application to represent the public interest and to speak for and on behalf of the five accused persons regarding a violation of their constitutional rights by the state, is to first produce documentary evidence of his readmission by the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, for admission to practise as advocate within this division,” Judge Karam said.
When Teffo said he intended to approach the offices of the Judge President and Deputy Judge President, Judge Karam made it clear that only his court could determine the issue.
“It is this court that will have to deliberate in the matter, and it is this court that will make the decision regarding this matter,” Judge Karam said.
Teffo was excused from the proceedings, and the trial continued with the State’s medical witness.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
