Rape case against cops collapses

A CASE in which three Police officers faced charges of rape and attempted obstruction of justice has stumbled in the starting blocks in the Tsumeb Regional Court.

The trial of the Police officers, Constable Mawila Hangula, Detective Inspector Abner Agas and Detective Sergeant MT Kaypiti, who previously were all stationed at Tsumeb, started before Magistrate Godwin Chizande in the Tsumeb Regional Court on Thursday last week. The trial was over on the same day, and all three suspects left the court with acquittals.The case in which the three accused officers were charged featured in the National Assembly in late September and mid-October last year, when the Minister of Safety and Security, Peter Tsheehama, had to answer a parliamentary question from Congress of Democrats leader Ben Ulenga in connection with allegations that claims of bribery were being investigated against Police officers as a result of the rape charge laid against Hangula.In his answer, Tsheehama said that it had come to light during an investigation of the withdrawal of a rape charge that had been laid against Hangula that the latter is a son of the Chief of the Namibian Central Intelligence Service, Lukas Hangula.The elder Hangula also is a former Inspector General of the Namibian Police.With an allegation having been reported that Hangula Snr had provided money that was allegedly paid to the family of the complainant in the rape case against Hangula Jnr in a bid to have the charge withdrawn, Tsheehama told Parliament that no criminal case had been registered against the NCIS chief.Tsheehama further said that the question about who allegedly provided the money that was claimed to have been offered to the complainant to sway her to withdraw the charge was still under investigation.On Thursday last week, Hangula, Agas and Kaypiti all pleaded not guilty to the two charges that each of them faced.In the first charge against Hangula alone, he was accused of having raped a young woman who was 18 years old at the time at Tsumeb in the period from September 29 to 30 2005.In an alternative to that charge, which was faced by Agas and Kaypiti alone, the two Police officers faced a count of having been accessories after the fact to the commission of a charge of rape.The three faced a second count of attempting to defeat or obstruct the course of justice together.In this charge, they were accused of having paid or attempted to pay the complainant and her mother N$2 000 in the period between the end of September 2005 and June last year, of having placed pressure on the complainant and her mother, and of having allowed Hangula Jnr to place pressure on the complainant, with the aim to persuade her and her mother not to proceed with the charge against Hangula.With the start of the trial, the complainant was the first witness to be called to the witness stand by Public Prosecutor Zenobia Barry.The complainant, who is now 20 years old, however did not give any evidence on the alleged rape.She only told the court that she did not want to continue with the charge that had been laid against Hangula, Barry and defence lawyers Jan Wessels, who represented Kaypiti, and Danie Kotze, who represented Hangula and Agas, told The Namibian yesterday.The complainant did not want to give any reasons for this decision not to continue with the case, Barry said.Barry tried to ask the Magistrate to use a section of the Criminal Procedure Act in terms of which a court can compel an unwilling witness to give evidence, but the two defence lawyers objected to this, Wessels and Kotze said.The Magistrate upheld the objection from the defence, and with that the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case crumbled away.Barry had to close the State’s case, and after that the three accused persons were acquitted.All the other charges depended on the first count of rape that Hangula faced, Kotze remarked.”The State had to prove the rape charge for all the other charges to stick,” he said.According to Kotze his client had informed the court through a plea explanation that while he was denying guilt on the rape charge, he was admitting that he had sexual intercourse with the complainant.The intercourse took place with her consent, he said.Hangula, Agas and Kaypiti were free on a warning from the court while their trial was pending.The trial was over on the same day, and all three suspects left the court with acquittals.The case in which the three accused officers were charged featured in the National Assembly in late September and mid-October last year, when the Minister of Safety and Security, Peter Tsheehama, had to answer a parliamentary question from Congress of Democrats leader Ben Ulenga in connection with allegations that claims of bribery were being investigated against Police officers as a result of the rape charge laid against Hangula.In his answer, Tsheehama said that it had come to light during an investigation of the withdrawal of a rape charge that had been laid against Hangula that the latter is a son of the Chief of the Namibian Central Intelligence Service, Lukas Hangula.The elder Hangula also is a former Inspector General of the Namibian Police.With an allegation having been reported that Hangula Snr had provided money that was allegedly paid to the family of the complainant in the rape case against Hangula Jnr in a bid to have the charge withdrawn, Tsheehama told Parliament that no criminal case had been registered against the NCIS chief.Tsheehama further said that the question about who allegedly provided the money that was claimed to have been offered to the complainant to sway her to withdraw the charge was still under investigation.On Thursday last week, Hangula, Agas and Kaypiti all pleaded not guilty to the two charges that each of them faced.In the first charge against Hangula alone, he was accused of having raped a young woman who was 18 years old at the time at Tsumeb in the period from September 29 to 30 2005.In an alternative to that charge, which was faced by Agas and Kaypiti alone, the two Police officers faced a count of having been accessories after the fact to the commission of a charge of rape.The three faced a second count of attempting to defeat or obstruct the course of justice together.In this charge, they were accused of having paid or attempted to pay the complainant and her mother N$2 000 in the period between the end of September 2005 and June last year, of having placed pressure on the complainant and her mother, and of having allowed Hangula Jnr to place pressure on the complainant, with the aim to persuade her and her mother not to proceed with the charge against Hangula.With the start of the trial, the complainant was the first witness to be called to the witness stand by Public Prosecutor Zenobia Barry.The complainant, who is now 20 years old, however did not give any evidence on the alleged rape.She only told the court that she did not want to continue with the charge that had been laid against Hangula, Barry and defence lawyers Jan Wessels, who represented Kaypiti, and Danie Kotze, who represented Hangula and Agas, told The Namibian yesterday.The complainant did not want to give any reasons for this decision not to continue with the case, Barry said.Barry tried to ask the Magistrate to use a section of the Criminal Procedure Act in terms of which a court can compel an unwilling witness to give evidence, but the two defence lawyers objected to this, Wessels and Kotze said.The Magistrate upheld the objection from the defence, and with that the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case crumbled away.Barry had to close the State’s case, and after that the three accused persons were acquitted.All the other charges depended on the first count of rape that Hangula faced, Kotze remarked.”The State had to prove the rape charge for all the other charges to stick,” he said.According to Kotze his client had informed the court through a plea explanation that while he was denying guilt on the rape charge, he was admitting that he had sexual intercourse with the complainant.The intercourse took place with her consent, he said.Hangula, Agas and Kaypiti were free on a warning from the court while their trial was pending.