Lawyer fires salvo at magistrate

Fungai Lupande Court Reporter—

Former Harare provincial magistrate Mr Vakayi Douglas Chikwekwe was on Tuesday accused by a Harare lawyer of writing a “false” letter, ordering a magistrate to reopen a criminal case, saying it was a directive from the High Court.The High Court had reserved judgment on Steven Paul Sugden’s application for review and proceedings were stayed pending ruling.

Sugden (41) is facing fraud charges and his lawyer, Mr Admire Rubaya, took to the stand to substantiate his application that the presiding magistrate was under illegitimate pressure and the matter be referred to the Constitutional Court.

Led by Advocate Thabani Mpofu, Mr Rubaya said: “There is a letter written by the former provincial head, Mr Chikwekwe, indicating that the trial magistrate, Mr Tendai Mahwe, who is now based in Mutare is required at the Harare Magistrates’ Court to preside over the matter.

“The letter indicates that there was an order from the High Court for State to reopen the case. There was no such order and the contents of the letter are false.

“In light of the letter, the court re- opened the case on November 25 2016, believing that the High Court had granted an order. I received a directive to appear before Judge President George Chiweshe, and I was advised that a letter had been written by one Tatiana Aleshina complaining that prosecution had been mishandled by the State and by the presiding magistrate.”

Mr Rubaya said there were undertones of allegations of corruption in the letter.

“The letter was addressed to Chief Magistrate Mishrod Guvamombe and copied to Commissioner of the Zimbabwe Republic Police Mr Augustine Chihuri, Judge President and the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission chairperson,” he said.

Mr Rubaya added that he intended to apply for referral to the Constitutional Court for the validity of the State’s conduct in the matter.

Mr Mahwe ruled that Mr Chikwekwe was not compromised and dismissed the application.

Mr Rubaya gave notice to apply for an urgent Constitutional Court ap- plication.

You Might Also Like

Comments