×
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.

Rushwaya, Mashingaidze case deferred

Sport
ZIMBABWE Football Association (Zifa) chief executive officer Jonathan Mashingaidze’s trial over allegations of criminal defamation against the association’s ex-boss Henrietta Rushwaya failed to kick

ZIMBABWE Football Association (Zifa) chief executive officer Jonathan Mashingaidze’s trial over allegations of criminal defamation against the association’s ex-boss Henrietta Rushwaya failed to kick off yesterday because part of the exhibit and the accused’s preferred lawyer were not available.

\Report by Phillip Chidavaenzi

Mashingaidze was arrested on July 18 last year after he allegedly claimed that senior national team players Knowledge Musona and Ovidy Karuru met with Rushwaya for the purposes of sabotaging the Zifa board through fixing the Warriors’ matches against Mozambique and Guinea.

Harare magistrate Gamuchirai Siwardi deferred the trial to May 6 when Advocate Lewis Uriri whom the Zifa board has elected to represent Mashingaidze would be available.

The court heard that a copy of the news bulletin was missing from summons that formed the basis of the charges and the defence would like to view the video clip prior to drafting its outline.

It was further stated that after the accused person was served with the summons, the Zifa board held a meeting on Thursday last week during which it was resolved that Advocate Uriri deal with the case. Uriri was, however, said to be away for two weeks due to other engagements and would be available on May 6.

Public Mpofu, from the Attorney General’s office, who is representing the State, grudgingly consented to the application.

“It is regrettable that we have been advised of this application today. It is the accused person’s constitutional right (to be represented by a lawyer of his choice), but counsel indicated the accused’s principals chose the defence counsel and I wonder if it is his choice. We, however, accept it. The exhibit will be provided, but that would not have stopped the trial from proceeding,” he said.

“We believe this is a waste of time because the clip was viewed on national television. Witnesses are engaged in other things and would want to come and testify. We appreciate that the defence counsel is away. In that regard I would reluctantly consent to the application.”