The High Court in Pretoria is expected to hear arguments on the admissibility of a statement by Sifiso Gwabini Zungu in the Senzo Meyiwa trial.

Gwabini is the third witness to be called by the defense.

Five men are on trial for the 2014 murder of the Bafana Bafana soccer captain.

The state has been asked to prove if a document said to have been signed by Sifiso “Gwabini” Zungu is indeed a statement.

It’s alleged that Gwabini hosted a gathering at a hostel in Vosloorus on Gauteng’s East Rand, where all the accused were allegedly present.

Gwabini claims he was assaulted and later made to sign a statement that he didn’t read by the police.

Defence counsel, Charles Mnisi, has objected to the state questioning Gwabini about the alleged statement.

Mnisi: “Objection, the state cannot say that statement belongs to the witness. The state must prove that statement belongs to this witness first before they can question him on it.”

Baloyi: “Well, the witness said the contents of the statement were transferred from one document to another. We don’t see an issue why we can’t question the witness about the statement.”

Mnisi: “The state must provide proof.”

Judge: “Ok, Mr Baloyi, prove that it’s a statement.”

Advocate George Baloyi felt it was relevant for the state to ask Gwabini about the contents of the signed document.

“The issue of this witness statement is a central to the cross-examination of the state and in light of the stance that has been adopted by my colleagues when they raised an objection. We suggest that the only way of dealing with the matter is if the matter is deferred and the state and the defence file heads on the admissibility of the contents, of the statement, and that a timetable the agreed upon for the filing of the heads. We’ve indicated that we can proceed, my Lord, with other issues.”

Judge Ratha Mokgoathleng says the defense and the state should submit heads of arguments on the matter.

“The state has an obligation to prove that statement to be because if a document which is signed under oath is being disputed, the state has and bears the owners to prove that the statement was made lawfully. Consequently, I think… the defence and the stage must arrange a date. going to how many days you need.?”