Update on courtcase against Daycare owner Belinda //Ga­roës

In 2013 Belinda //Ga­roës, owner of a daycare center for poor children in a suburb of Okahandja, Namibia, was incarcerated on several criminal charges following an eviction order. Read more about that in "City Councils Vendetta against owner of Day-Care center in Okahandja" and here about my day in court with her.

I somehow lost contact with Belinda after that day until 14th February 2015, when she suddenly turned up again, telling me about the pending trial date on Monday, 16th February. This time she showed me the stack of documents she had received - transcriptions of all previous hearings.
While going through those transcripts I found the one pertaining to the trial date, which was eventually set for 16 February 2015 in a hearing in August 2014. Right up until that time she had not received any disclosure documents. In the August hearing the magistrate ordered that she had a right to those documents and that she should apply to receive them. When i asked her about that, she told me she had followed the order and personally handed in the application, without making a copy of it, however.  Oops, a grave mistake. 

When I asked her for the disclosure documents, she pointed to the documents in my hand, telling me that is what she received on February 13 at the court offices.  Oh poor woman! But how was she to know? So her only option was to once again ask for the disclosure documents at the start of Mondays proceedings.

Well, today during lunchtime Belinda came to report about the proceedings. Apparently the prosecutor, right at the start of the  hearing, told the magistrate that she hadn't yet handed out the disclosure documents to Belinda, but would do so at 16h00. So the trial date was once again postponed to the 4th of June 2015 and Belinda is as happy as can come.

I haven't yet heard if she did in fact receive disclosure today. Will post another update if and when I hear from the lady again. 

Update 17/2/2015: She did not get the disclosure documents yesterday because they now charge for those(illegally as I found out), and she of course had no money to pay for them.







  

Enforce Your Right in Court - Transcript for Namibians

Ensuring a Fair Trial

The Namibian Constitution – is the supreme law of the land.

Article 5  subjects  the  Executive, Legislature and Judiciary and all organs of the Government and its agencies to it.   

Article 12  describes the right to a fair and public hearing.                                                                              

Thus it follows that when State appears against defendant, defendant must be given the opportunity to understand and establish the nature and cause of the charges against him and the jurisdiction to be used in order to properly defend him/her self in a fair trial. 

 How to do that is discussed in the audio embedded in the first article on this matter. Since that audio cannot be saved, I have made a transcript of the steps and adapted them where applicable to the Namibian Constitution. The steps can now be copied or printed as needed.

Steps to follow in Court

1. The first question of the judge must be: do you understand the charges against you?                                                  

    You: NO your honor, I don’t. I need you to answer a couple of questions.  I need to understand the nature and cause of the charges against me. Is this case to be heard under a civil or a criminal jurisdiction?  

If the judge does not ask that question, you immediately say:  

Objection, your honor. I do not understand the nature and cause of the charges against me. I need some questions to be answered. Is this case to be heard under a civil or a criminal jurisdiction?  

 2.1. If judge answers “civil”  

    

   You: Thank you, your honor. Let the record of this court then show that this action against me, (your name), is a civil action. Since this is a civil action, I make a motion to dismiss for lack of a sworn complaint by an injured party and no injured party is present.

2.1.2. If the judge then says the State is the injured party                           

You: I make a motion that this case be dismissed. We are in the wrong court.  If the State is a party to the case, they cannot also be the judge and prosecutors. This case needs to be transferred to an independent, impartial court or be dismissed.

2.1.3. If the judge denies this motion                                                         

You : Objection, your honor. Article 12 of the Constitution guarantees me a fair and public hearing by an independent, impartial and competent Court or Tribunal. Let the record of this court then show that the motion to dismiss this case on grounds of partiality has been denied by this court.

2.1.4. If the judge advises legal help                                                                

You: Thank you, your honor, but I don’t think you’d be violating your oath of office if you did your duty under the Constitution. You see, I’m not seeking legal advice, but legal intent. I have the constitutional right to appear as myself in my own person without a licensed attorney. In order to intelligently defend myself I have to get certain questions answered.  The Constitution grants me the right to a fair trial and it assigns you the duty to ensure its fairness. I don’t think you’d be violating your office for doing your duty. Therefore, will you please answer my question so this court is properly identified.

2.2. If the judge answers “criminal”                                                               

You: Thank you, your honor. Let the record of this court then show that this action against me,(your name), is a criminal action. Now I have another question, your honor. The Constitution grants this court two different criminal jurisdictions. One is a criminal jurisdiction under the common law and the other is a criminal jurisdiction under civil law. In which of these two jurisdictions does the court intend to try me?

  3.  If the Judge tells you to get an attorney

Y You: Thank you, your honor, but I don’t think you’d be violating your oath of office if you did your duty under the Constitution. You see, I’m not seeking legal advice, but legal intent. According to article 12 (1)(d) I have the constitutional right to appear as myself in my own person without a licensed attorney although I am entitled to be defended by a legal practitioner of my choice. In order to intelligently defend myself, I have to know under which jurisdiction you intend to try me so as to proceed with this case. Therefore, will you please answer my question, so this court is properly identified.

  4. If the Judge tells you it's a court under statutory jurisdiction of the laws of Namibia.

   You: Thank you, your honor. Please let the record of this court show that it intends to conduct a criminal action against me, (your name), under a statutory jurisdiction. But your honor, that raises another question. I have never heard of such a thing as a criminal action under statutory jurisdiction and there is no such reference in the constitution.   I would be happy to accept this, your honor, if you could please tell me where I could find the published rules of criminal procedure under statutory jurisdiction and where this nature, cause and jurisdiction information exists. It is imperative that I have the published rules of procedure, so that I can conduct a fair defense in a fair trial.

5.1. If the Judge wants to plead "not guilty" on your behalf

You: Your honor, I object. For you to enter a plea on my behalf is practicing law from the bench, because offering a plea is my or my attorneys job. Has the court made a judicial determination that I am not guilty?
       If he says yes:  
Thank you, your honor.Let the record reflect that the judge has made a judicial determination that I am not guilty of the charges against me. Therefore I make a motion that the case be dismissed because the judge has determined that I am not guilty. 
       If he says no:
Thank you your honor.I make a motion that the plea be withdrawn and I be allowed to make my own plea once I know the nature and cause of the case pending against me.

5.2. If the Judge wants to enter a plea of “no contest” on your behalf

You: Your honor, I object. For you to enter a plea on my behalf is practicing law from the bench, because offering a plea is my or my attorneys job. For you to make a judicial determination that I am entering a plea of no contest would result in the court treating me as though I have pleaded guilty. The court is trying to constrain me to an unfair plea choice of no contest in absence of my understanding the nature and cause of the charges against me. 
I make a motion that the plea be withdrawn and this case be dismissed because the court has failed to identify a legitimate jurisdiction.

 

6. If the Judge: denies motion for withdrawal of plea and dismissal of case

   You:   Your honor, Article 12(1)(e) of the Constitution affords me adequate time before commencement of or during the trial for preparation and presentment of my defense. Therefore I would like to request that we set a motions hearing prior to the trial, as I must resolve some pivotal key issues in order to continue and these motions must be heard prior to the trial so that I can properly defend myself. 

7. If judge threatens with contempt of court                                                               You : Your honor, I do not wish to be held in contempt.I am simply trying to exercise my constitutional right that you disclose the nature and cause of the charges against me.
I can provide court citations that show that the exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime. Please, either properly identify the jusrisdiction or I make a motion that the case against me be dismissed.


8. If judge dismisses the case:
Thank you your honor. Let the record of this court reflect
that case number ...against (your name here) has been dismissed. 
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Important Note:
   If you want to use the Steps in court, DO NOT deviate. Use them exactly as they are, in English. They are a transcript from the audio here, which is authoritative, meaning it comes from those in the know, legal advisers.

   A transcript is but a written version of an Audio of Video. It assists those who are unable to listen. 
   Any deviation whatsoever places you in a vulnerable position.
 

Enforce Your Right in Court #2 - a Namibian view

If you have listened to the video in my previous article and have some experience of court proceedings in Namibia, you may argue that the suggestions in it cannot be applied by Namibians.

Sure, there are some things that are handled a bit differently here and of course we cannot refer to the American constitution, but must stick to our own Namibian Constitution and get to know how things are done locally. If we do not know our constitutional rights, the officials have an easy time to intimidate and overrun us. How can we enforce our rights if we don't know them? 

It seems to me that everything in the video is happening during the arraignment hearing, the purpose of which is to publicly inform you about the charges against you and find out how you intend to react. In Namibia this hearing is very brief. It serves only to inform you about why you were put in custody and how much bail you have to pay to get out of jail quickly. From what I heard from prison inmates, that hearing isn't the one mentioned in the video. Yet already at that very first appearance before court you have to be very attentive to what is said and be careful to portray yourself as a sovereign man/woman of Namibia. 

Even if they force you to appear in court as a "beggar", unwashed, unkempt, unshaven and in dirty clothes, you are a sovereign, innocent until proven guilty. They purposely intimidate and degrade you in public to try and prove themselves right. If you know what is written in Article 8,10,11 +12 of our Constitution, that knowledge alone transforms you to kingship and reveals them as traitors and criminals. So act like a king, portray your sovereignty. A king doesn't argue with his vassals, a king keeps his calm, always stays cool and aloof.    

So now the Bail. The main purpose of bail is to ensure the defendant will appear in court for trial. Some lawyers in Namibia, however, reckon that paying bail is an admission of guilt and a case can't be withdrawn once bail is paid. So it's up to us to decide what to do. 

Back to the video: it then follows that those steps given there would pertain to the trial stage of a case in Namibia. There the defendant officially gets the first chance to open his mouth in his own defense, if he/she so wishes. Article 12 (1) (d) and (e) gives us the right to defend ourselves and the option to use a legal practitioner of our choice for that end. So don't think you have to use a lawyer.  

The main point you must get into your head is to NEVER let your emotions get in your way in court. If you know you can't control yourself, a lawyer may be the only option you have, but by using one you give away your right and your sovereignty and become a slave again.