Gula-Ndebele Walks Free After Court Finds Cocaine Evidence Unreliable

A Harare magistrate has discharged Bulawayo entrepreneur and farmer Elephi Khumbula Gula-Ndebele, the son of the former Attorney General Sobusa Gula-Ndebele, at the close of the State’s case.

The court ruled that prosecutors had failed to establish a prima facie case linking him to cocaine allegedly found in a vehicle he was driving.

The ruling was handed down on 19 June by Harare magistrate Lisah Mutendereki. It followed an application for discharge filed under section 198(3) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act by Ndebele’s lawyers, Chikuni Associates. The State did not oppose the application.

In their submissions, the defence argued that the State’s evidence was “manifestly unreliable” because of a broken chain of custody involving the alleged drugs.

Ndebele had been charged with possession of dangerous drugs under section 157(1) of the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act.

Police claimed they recovered a white substance from his vehicle that tested positive for cocaine.

But the defence said prosecutors could not prove the substance allegedly found in the vehicle was the same one sent to police forensic laboratories for testing.

Court papers show the State did not produce a notice of seizure detailing what was recovered from Ndebele’s vehicle.

The defence also argued that Detective Sergeant Mupome, who submitted the sample for testing, was not part of the arresting team. There was no documentation showing how he came into possession of the substance.

“There is no evidence of where Sergeant Mupome obtained the sample he submitted to forensics for testing,” the application stated.

The lawyers argued that the broken chain of custody made the cocaine exhibit inadmissible and that the court could not safely rely on it.

The defence also questioned whether the State could prove intent to possess the alleged drugs.

Court papers show the investigating officer conceded under cross-examination that the vehicle carried corporate branding and was used by several people, not just the accused.

The officer reportedly admitted other users of the vehicle might have known about the drugs, while Ndebele himself did not.

The defence said those concessions weakened the State’s case and made the evidence unreliable.

At the close of the State’s case, the magistrate granted the application for discharge and acquitted Ndebele without requiring him to mount a defence.

A prima facie case means the prosecution has presented enough credible evidence that, if unchallenged, could lead to a conviction.

It doesn’t mean guilt has been proven — only that there’s a reasonable basis for the accused to be called upon to defend themselves.

If no, the court issues a discharge at the close of the State case under section 198(3) of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act [Chapter 9:07].

More: NewsDay