Magistrate Linus Samunzala will on Thursday continue to hear arguments in the trial of activist Michael Amushelelo and his co-accused, Dimbulukeni Nauyoma, who are facing several charges, including incitement of violence and rioting, after their arrests on March 21.

In the proceeding, the state called to the stand witnesses from the police, including two warrant officers and an inspector. The state witnesses consistently testified that they observed how Amushelelo and Dimbulukeni obeyed orders from the then-acting |Khomas Regional Commander, Deputy Commissioner Chrispin Mubebo.

According to the witnesses, the crowd gathered to protest, and upon being given a five-minute dispersal order, they promptly complied. The court was further informed that Deputy Commissioner Mubebo instructed the police to follow the crowd as they began to disperse. 

Mubebo personally followed a red vehicle in which the accused, Amushelelo and Nauyoma, were allegedly travelling, said one of the officers who was following the vehicle driven by her commander.

Subsequently, the two were stopped and ordered into a police van, and it was after their removal from the scene that stones were thrown at a police van by an unknown person, damaging the rear screen. The state witnesses also denied witnessing any violence and could not therefore attribute the charges fashioned against the accused persons, as such was not observed at the alleged crime scene.

Surprisingly, the state witnesses could not explicitly tell the court the reason why the accused persons were arrested, maintaining that they only heard the accused calling for calm and to cooperate with law enforcement officers.

Parliamentarian Inna Hengari was initially one of the arrested three, but the charges against her were subsequently dropped. Before the trial, Juliet Amushelelo, the wife of incarcerated activist Amushelelo, spearheaded a protest, calling for the release of her husband. A notable number of politicians also attended the trial.

Although objected to by the defence lawyer, the magistrate granted leave, the prayer of the prosecution, to be granted one more day to accommodate a witness who was unavailable today.

The prosecution is adamant that the two activists violated the public gathering law; however, in a criminal case, the burden of proof is placed on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt, or at least on a balance of probability.