×
NewsDay

AMH is an independent media house free from political ties or outside influence. We have four newspapers: The Zimbabwe Independent, a business weekly published every Friday, The Standard, a weekly published every Sunday, and Southern and NewsDay, our daily newspapers. Each has an online edition.

New twist to ZimRights case

News
HARARE magistrate Georgina Ndava will now preside over the trial of four ZimRights officials and two others

HARARE magistrate Georgina Ndava will now preside over the trial in which four ZimRights officials and two others, who allegedly manufactured fake voter registration certificates, following the decision by magistrate Tendai Mahwe to recuse himself from the case.

Report by Philip Chidavaenzi

This followed an application by the defence team which argued that Mahwe had denied one of the accused, ZimRights director Okay Machisa, bail after which High Court judge Justice Samuel Kudya overturned the ruling.

Justice Kudya declared that the placement on remand of Machisa on January 15 and 16 was invalid.

Machisa’s lawyer, Beatrice Mtetwa, had argued that Mahwe had misdirected himself by finding that the State case as it appeared on a form established a prima facie case and to that end wrongfully placed Machisa on remand.

The trial, however, failed to commence after the lawyers representing the ZimRights officials, Machisa, ZimRights education programmes officer Leo Chamahwinya, Highfield local chapter chairperson Dorcas Shereni, board member Nunurayi Jena as well as two other individuals, Farai Bhani and Tatenda Chinaka, requested that the matter be tried in a courtroom with recording equipment to capture every detail.

While all the other accused persons are appearing in their individual capacities, Jena is representing ZimRights.

Mtetwa told the court, with the consent of the other lawyers — Advocate Tonderai Bhatasara, Tavengwa Masara, Selby Hwacha and Trust Maanda — that they wanted the trial recorded electronically.

The State, which is represented by Sidon Chinzete, however raised concern that the demand had not been communicated to them so they had not made such arrangements.

Mtetwa argued that the request was not unusual and they had been assured that the matter would be heard in a regional court, which is fully equipped, only to be shuffled from one court to the other.

“We have always made that request, but perhaps Mr Chinzete is new in the case. We have been told that it is going to be a regional court matter and according to the summons, it was supposed to be heard in Court 1. Then we had to go to Court 5 where we were then referred to Court Number 4. And in Court Number 4, the magistrate has recused himself,” she said.

Mtetwa argued that it was the accused persons’ entitlement to have the trial proceedings recorded because of the political sensitivity surrounding it.

“The matter has been given undue prominence with suggestions that there could be UN (United Nations) intervention. The State has politicised what is a simple matter. So it is important to have a record of the proceedings,” she said.