Shaduka takes his bail bid to the High Court

WERNER MENGES BUSINESSMAN and murder suspect Lazarus Shaduka, accused of killing his wife in Windhoek three months ago, has now turned to the High Court in a continued effort to get released on bail while a murder charge against him remains pending.

A month after a bail bid failed for a second time in the Windhoek Magistrate’s Court, Shaduka on Friday appealed to the High Court to release from custody. In a hearing before Judge Elton Hoff and Acting Judge Christie Liebenberg, Shaduka’s lawyer, Titus Ipumbu, argued that the Magistrate who heard Shaduka’s first bail applications had made an error when she decided to refuse him bail.Deputy Prosecutor General Antonia Verhoef defended the Magistrate’s decision as entirely correct.Judge Hoff and Acting Judge Liebenberg are scheduled to give their ruling on the appeal on Friday next week.Shaduka (35) is facing a charge that he had murdered his wife, Selma Shaimemanya (33), by shooting her with a pistol in the couple’s home in Windhoek on the evening of July 13.It is alleged that when he took his mortally injured wife to a clinic in Eros, he claimed that she had shot herself in an apparent suicide attempt.The Police however regarded the position of the gunshot wound with which Shaimemanya was taken to the clinic – located on her back, between her shoulders – as suspicious, leading to Shaduka’s arrest.After being arrested, Shaduka allegedly changed tack, telling the Police that Shaimemanya was shot accidentally when a firearm that was in his hand went off.Ipumbu argued on Friday that the Magistrate was wrong to conclude that there was a possibility that Shaduka might abscond if he was released on bail and that it was not in the public interest or the interest of justice to grant Shaduka bail.Shaduka had assured the court that he would not abscond, Ipumbu said.He argued that the risks of Shaduka absconding could have been curtailed by imposing bail conditions on him.Ipumbu remarked that Shaduka is a Namibian citizen who has “substantial” business interests in Namibia.He argued that the State would not be prejudiced if Shaduka was granted bail, with a set of conditions attached to his release to address the risk of him absconding before his trial.Verhoef argued that the Magistrate’s decision to turn down Shaduka’s application for bail could not be faulted.She said the Magistrate was correct to make a finding that in her opinion the gunshot injury that claimed Shaimemanya’s life could not have been self-inflicted.The Magistrate could have placed greater emphasis on the conflicting statements that had been made by Shaduka, though, so where she erred, she did so in Shaduka’s favour, Verhoef argued.She told the court that the State has a strong case against Shaduka.With murder being a serious offence, there is a likelihood that if he is convicted, he could receive a heavy sentence, she indicated.In these circumstances, the risk of an injustice being done to Shaduka if he is not released on bail is diminished, she indicated.Shaduka, dressed in a dark striped suit, remained standing in the dock throughout the appeal hearing.He appeared to be fidgety, and at times muttered and gestured to himself in apparent agreement and disagreement with the arguments being made in front of him.He and his wife were married in April last year.They have a one-year-old child, who is claimed to have been the only other person in the couple’s house at the time of the shooting.In a hearing before Judge Elton Hoff and Acting Judge Christie Liebenberg, Shaduka’s lawyer, Titus Ipumbu, argued that the Magistrate who heard Shaduka’s first bail applications had made an error when she decided to refuse him bail.Deputy Prosecutor General Antonia Verhoef defended the Magistrate’s decision as entirely correct.Judge Hoff and Acting Judge Liebenberg are scheduled to give their ruling on the appeal on Friday next week.Shaduka (35) is facing a charge that he had murdered his wife, Selma Shaimemanya (33), by shooting her with a pistol in the couple’s home in Windhoek on the evening of July 13.It is alleged that when he took his mortally injured wife to a clinic in Eros, he claimed that she had shot herself in an apparent suicide attempt.The Police however regarded the position of the gunshot wound with which Shaimemanya was taken to the clinic – located on her back, between her shoulders – as suspicious, leading to Shaduka’s arrest.After being arrested, Shaduka allegedly changed tack, telling the Police that Shaimemanya was shot accidentally when a firearm that was in his hand went off.Ipumbu argued on Friday that the Magistrate was wrong to conclude that there was a possibility that Shaduka might abscond if he was released on bail and that it was not in the public interest or the interest of justice to grant Shaduka bail.Shaduka had assured the court that he would not abscond, Ipumbu said.He argued that the risks of Shaduka absconding could have been curtailed by imposing bail conditions on him.Ipumbu remarked that Shaduka is a Namibian citizen who has “substantial” business interests in Namibia.He argued that the State would not be prejudiced if Shaduka was granted bail, with a set of conditions attached to his release to address the risk of him absconding before his trial.Verhoef argued that the Magistrate’s decision to turn down Shaduka’s application for bail could not be faulted.She said the Magistrate was correct to make a finding that in her opinion the gunshot injury that claimed Shaimemanya’s life could not have been self-inflicted.The Magistrate could have placed greater emphasis on the conflicting statements that had been made by Shaduka, though, so where she erred, she did so in Shaduka’s favour, Verhoef argued.She told the court that the State has a strong case against Shaduka.With murder being a serious offence, there is a likelihood that if he is convicted, he could receive a heavy sentence, she indicated.In these circumstances, the risk of an injustice being done to Shaduka if he is not released on bail is diminished, she indicated.Shaduka, dressed in a dark striped suit, remained standing in the dock throughout the appeal hearing.He appeared to be fidgety, and at times muttered and gestured to himself in apparent agreement and disagreement with the arguments being made in front of him.He and his wife were married in April last year.They have a one-year-old child, who is claimed to have been the only other person in the couple’s house at the time of the shooting.