Ann Eveleth
AS proceedings got underway in the Malan trial Judge Jan Hugo’s eyes crinkled and his grey bearded face lit up with a jovial smile as he broke the ice to share a joke with Attorney General Tim McNally.
Agreeing to postpone the trial to give the seven defence teams more time to consult with the accused on the alternative count of conspiracy to kill supporters of the ANC and United Democratic Front, Hugo asked McNally whether he thought once the accused saw the further particulars, they would change their plea to guilty.
A flushed McNally, under the public spotlight more than ever before, smiled and stammered: “No, I don’t think so.” Fending off a barrage of criticism from the seven defence teams, many of whom complained that his charges were “vague and confusing”, McNally held his own. Waving around a “daunting” set of about 250 pages of further particulars he had furnished to the defence, McNally countered that the charges were “as clear as day.”
Leading defence advocate Klaus von Lieres, however, pleaded for more time to discuss the most recent charge with his clients, particularly accused number six, Alex Biyela, who is serving a six-year prison term for murdering a policeman in Ulundi.
Assigned to the ‘trial of the decade’ after a twist of fate saw Judge President Howard recusing himself from the case due to a spinal ailment, Hugo told the Mail & Guardian he felt “daunted” when he first heard the news.
The only other high-profile case Hugo recalled hearing involved the 1990 shooting deaths of seven bus commuters near KwaMashu by three members of the Afrikaaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB) and Orde van die Boerevolk.
The three men launched a retaliatory racial attack after a group of Pan-Africanist youths had stabbed white shoppers on the Durban beachfront. The bus attack left seven dead and 18 injured.
Hugo sentenced one of the men, Eugene Marais, to death seven times after he confessed.
Appointed to the bench in Pietermaritzburg in 1988 after several years as a prosecutor, justice department lecturer and advocate in Pretoria, the Benoni-born judge is publicity-shy and says he would prefer to remain “a mystery” character in the high-profile political drama set to unfold in his courtroom.
Conceding reluctantly to an interview, Hugo said he believes judges should “remain somewhat distant from the public (because) South Africa is still a comparatively small and closed society. If judges are seen to involve themselves too much in the issues of society, they could lose their objectivity”.
Although his wife and two high school-age sons have grown used to him being away from home during his eight-year stint on the bench hearing “rapes and murders by the dozen”, Hugo is unlikely to have much time for his hobbies of reading and fly- fishing once the trial gets underway.
Also expected to have to juggle a tight schedule is assessor Herbert Qedusizi “HQ” Msimang. The first African assessor to hear a high-profile political trial in South Africa, Msimang is described by his peers as a “solid and respected attorney”. Tight-lipped about the case which he described as “very sensitive”, Msimang is modest about his achievements and says there are “no fireworks” in his background.
Attached to the high-profile firm of Shepstone and Wiley in Pietermaritzburg after amalgamating his private practice with the firm last July, Msimang studied law at the University of Zululand before pursuing a Master’s degree in Constitutional Criminal Procedures at Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana.
He later served on the law faculty of his first alma mater, and practiced law in Maseru, Lesotho in the 1970s, before returning to open his own practice in Mpumalanga and later in his home town of Pietermaritzburg.