Windhoek: has ruled that oral admissions allegedly made by two men accused of raping, robbing, and murdering a Walvis Bay man are inadmissible, finding that the State failed to prove they were made after the accused had been properly informed of their constitutional rights.

According to Namibia Press Agency, Judge Philanda Christiaan delivered the ruling on Friday following a trial-within-a-trial to determine whether statements allegedly made by Quanito van Vuuren and Moses Sem to police could be admitted as evidence in their murder trial. Van Vuuren and Sem are charged with the murder, robbery, and rape of Vernon Gavin, who was allegedly attacked at his Walvis Bay home in December 2023.

Defence lawyers Milton Engelbrecht and Albert Titus argued that detectives failed to properly explain the accused's constitutional rights after their arrest, including their right to remain silent and to obtain legal representation before making any statements. In her ruling, Judge Christiaan found that the State had not proved beyond reasonable doubt that either accused had been adequately informed of those rights before making the oral admissions.

'The constitutional right to remain silent and the right to legal representation serve a practical purpose,' the judge said. 'Their protection depends upon a clear explanation before questioning begins and a reliable basis for concluding that the suspect understood and waived them,' she ruled. Regarding Sem, the judge said the State had failed to demonstrate that he had received sufficient information to make an informed decision about whether to speak to investigators.

'He must receive enough information to understand that he is entitled to remain silent, that he need not answer incriminating questions, that what he says may be used against him, and that he is entitled to legal assistance before deciding whether to speak,' the judge noted. She further found that the State had failed to exclude the reasonable possibility that Sem believed he was obliged to answer police questions.

Christiaan said the circumstances surrounding the statement, including the police station environment, the absence of a reliable record showing an informed waiver of rights, and Sem's evidence about the investigating officer's conduct, created reasonable doubt that the admission had been made freely and voluntarily. The court also rejected the State's argument that Van Vuuren's admission remained admissible despite evidence that he had consumed alcohol before making it.

The trial was postponed to Monday for continuation.