Zimpapers Logo

Sharuko On Saturday
“I must state, however, that, to a large extent, I agreed with the defendants that (Lazarus) Riva and (Terrence) Antonio, who admitted being related, gave evidence which appeared to have been ‘rehearsed’. I DID NOT FIND BOTH OF THEM TO BE CREDIBLE WITNESSES. DESPITE APPARENT ‘COACHING’ THE TWO WITNESSES ALSO DIFFERED ON THE DISTANCES SEPARATING THE PLAINTIFF AND THE FIRST DEFENDANT.” — Justice Mtshiya.

FINALLY, it’s all over and, as ABBA, that Swedish super pop group of the ‘70s would sing, in one of their all-time greatest hits, “the winner takes it all, the loser standing small, besides the victory, that’s my destiny.”
It was ABBA who told us, the children of the ’70s, the kids who came with colour television, that “the gods may throw a dice, their minds as cold as ice, and someone way down here, loses someone dear,” but “the winner takes it all, the loser has to fall, it’s simple and it’s plain, why should I complain.”
That the hit-song, The Winner Takes It All, was released in 1980, when this country was celebrating the birth of its nationhood, when music and freedom joined to bring that incredible feeling of greatness that we suddenly felt oozing in our veins, made this song a very part of us.
Wikipedia will tell you that the song reached number one in Belgium, United Kingdom, Ireland, the Netherlands and South Africa and top five in Sweden, Austria, Finland, France, Norway, Switzerland and the world’s newest nation, Zimbabwe.
It was in that song that ABBA told us, that “the judges will decide, the likes of me abide, spectators of the show, always staying low, the game is on again, a lover or a friend, a big thing or a small, the winner takes it all.”
Thirty four years after its release, the lyrics still hold that romantic persuasion they had on the generation that heard this song for the first time back then in 1980, some of us had to wait until December that year when my late brother Sam, as he always did on his annual Christmas pilgrimage back home to Chakari from Kamativi, where he worked as a boilermaker, brought with him some new LPs to be played during the celebrations.
One of the LPs, in Sam’s classic collection, was The Police’s Regatta de Blanca and I remember, as a Grade Four kid intoxicated by the age of innocence, the first time I heard the timeless classic, Walking On The Moon, one night that ’80 Christmas holiday, and the beat “dooo, doooo, doooom, doooooooo, dooo, dooooom,” and I said ‘Wow!’
The other LP, in my brother’s classic summer collection that year, was ABBA’s Super Trouper, and while I didn’t appreciate the lyrical genius in The Winner Takes It All back then, for the obvious lack of a brain developed well enough to be charmed by such beauty, I loved the song and it stayed with me and, the more I heard it and understood it, the more I appreciated it.
This week, its lyrics came flooding back in my mind, after something significant happened in my life, and on Thursday night, on the lonely drive back home, on the deserted roads of a Harare at peace with itself in its sleep, as the arrival of midnight brought in another day, I heard those closing lyrics again.
“I don’t want to talk, If it makes you feel sad, And I understand, You’ve come to shake my hand, I apologise, If it makes you feel bad, Seeing me so tense, No self-confidence, But you see, The winner takes it all, The loser has to fall, it’s simple and it’s plain, why should I complain.”

The Defamation Suit
In The High Court
It has taken four years, it has covered the entire lifespan of the current Zifa board and, as if the gods of football had a huge mystical influence over it, the ending came in the very month that signals the end of the term of office for those running our national game.
I have always believed it’s one case that provides a true picture, a true representative of my volatile relationship with members of the Zifa board, a group of individuals who have spent four years trying to find the best way to silence me as if their manifestos, which they sold to the gullible electorate in 2010, included my scalp as a priceless conquest.
A group of people so cruel, so heartless it borders on being demonic, so ruthless it borders on being psychopathic, found an obsession, investing all the energy that could be summoned, in a relentless battle to try and crush me, by all means necessary, because in their eyes I was that little but annoying fly that should be squashed.
In the High Court of Zimbabwe, I stood alone as the defendant, in a case that ran for three years after Zifa board member, responsible for finance, Elliot Kasu, filed a US$300 000 defamation suit against me in what was filed as —Elliot Kasu vs Robson Sharuko and Zimpapers (1980) Ltd Case Number HC3335/11.
Kasu’s claim against me and Zimpapers was for:
1. Payment of US$300 000 being damages suffered by plaintiff (Kasu) to his reputation arising out of three defamatory articles published by the Herald newspaper.
2. Interest thereon from the date of service of summons to the date of final payment.
3. Costs of suit
In his judgment, Justice Mtshiya noted “that at the close of his case the plaintiff reduced his claim from US$300 000 to US$21 000.
“Kasu’s defamation suit was anchored on three articles published in this newspaper, the first one on October 13 2010, headlined “Sharuko Threatened”,  which he alleged was intended to be understood by the readers to mean that:-
6.1 The plaintiff (Kasu) is a bully with propensity to resort to violent behaviour when aggrieved.
6.2 The plaintiff was an incompetent administrator who, instead of concentrating on the good management of the game, spent time intimidating those persons who would question his decisions.
6.3 The plaintiff was a ruthless and unscrupulous man who would not stop even at violence or murder to get his way and,
6.4 The plaintiff was a scoundrel who was determined to use violence to stop truth from being told by a journalist.
“The second article published on October 16, 2010, was headlined “Zifa Board Member In Court”, which Kasu alleged was intended to be understood by readers to mean that the Zifa board member:-
9.1 Was a person given to abusing his military past to bully and threaten civilians, in this case Robson Sharuko.
9.2 Was an intolerant criminal and a person of low moral fibre who would stoop so low as to threaten, abuse and insult a journalist in order to hinder him from performing his duties.
9.3 Was a common criminal given to provoking a breach of the peace in short, just another football hooligan.
“The third article, published on this page on October 23 2010, was headlined “Tears From The Heart,” and Kasu said “readers would understand same to mean that (he):-
12.1 Is a liar who falsely imputed to the 1st defendant (Sharuko) allegations of match-fixing in order to escape the consequences of a prosecution that the plaintiff had initiated against him.
12.2 Is an incompetent and contemptible administrator and that his administrative capacity has been discredited and exposed by the 1st defendant.
“For the three articles, deemed wrongful and defamatory, the plaintiff claimed US$100 000 on each publication. This brought the total of damages claimed to US$300 000 (i.e. before being revised to US$21 000 at the close of the hearing)
“The plaintiff said he was before the Court to seek damages for his damaged image following the publications quoted herein at Pages 2,3 and 4.
“The plaintiff said he had read the article published by the second defendant (Zimpapers) on 13 October 2010. He was shocked by the contents of the article and denied ever having said the words in question. He said the article was a fabrication which did not reflect the truth.
“The plaintiff said following the report made to the police by the first defendant, he was prosecuted but found not guilty at the end of the trial in the Magistrates Court. The second defendant, according to the witness, did not publicise his acquittal.
“The plaintiff went further to state that he was part of the team that investigated what became popularly known as the “Asiagate Scandal” and that being the case the “offensive” parts of exh 1 (Tears From The Heart) referred to him in particular.”
The Witnesses Who Gave
Evidence For Kasu
Lazarus Riva is a photo journalist, who was at the National Sports Stadium that fateful day on October 10, 2010 and “he did not hear the plaintiff say the words contained in the article published by the second defendant on 13 October 2010,” and “said the plaintiff was, at the alleged time, busy talking to (Ndumiso) Gumede,” and “according to his evidence the plaintiff and the first defendant were 15 metres apart,” and “he was, therefore surprised and shocked to read the report.”
Terrence Antonio, a lecturer at Harare Polytechnic, said “the plaintiff, according to him, was six to eight metres away from him. He also saw the defendant who was also 10 metres away from him.
“Antonio said he never heard the plaintiff swearing at or threatening the first defendant (i.e. saying what was reported by the second defendant on 13 October 2010). He further said the plaintiff never went nearer to where the first defendant was standing and that, if threats were made, he would have heard them.
“He was, therefore, surprised to read the article as published.
“UNDER CROSS EXAMINATION, ANTONIO SAID RIVA, THE OTHER WITNESS, WAS HIS UNCLE. He said they had not discussed the evidence they would tender in court to that end and, as far as he was concerned, the evidence was independent.”
The last witness for the plaintiff was Mrs Kudakwashe Mhaka, a neighbour of the plaintiff, who had known him for 10 years as someone people looked to for help in the neighbourhood and confirmed that the plaintiff was a religious man.
“She was, therefore, shocked and disturbed by the second defendant’s report of 13 October 2010 concerning the alleged threats against the first defendant, which threats were attributed to the plaintiff. She said she did not believe the plaintiff could have said what the second defendant published. The report, she said, portrayed a totally different character of the plaintiff.”
What The Honourable Judge Said About Us
“Like the plaintiff, the first defendant gave his evidence confidently. He said he is a Sports Journalist and has been in the employ of the first defendant since 1 November 1992. He currently holds the position of Senior Sports Editor at The Herald.
“He said as he was exiting the VIP Enclosure after the match (Zimbabwe versus Cape Verde, October 10, 2010), he got attracted by people who were on the right side of the VIP Enclosure. He said as a journalist he was drawn by instinct to get closer to the scene of the interview.
“He said as he was standing near the scene of the interview, 1-2 metres away, he was struck by a conversation that was going on between the plaintiff and a group of people gathered around him. He said the group of people included Zifa board member Patrick Hokonya and Gift Banda.
“He said the group was discussing how Zimbabwe had failed to beat Cape Verde. It was during those discussions that he then heard the plaintiff say what he then reported to the police. He said after the plaintiff’s utterances he was traumatised and immediately phoned the Zifa President, Mr Cuthbert Dube, informing him of what had happened.
“He said the (police) report was being made for security purposes. He agreed that if the report was false, it would certainly have an adverse impact on the character of the plaintiff. He, however, maintained that what he reported to the police was correct and the article published on 13 October 2010 accurately captured what he reported to the police.
“He also said the article published on 16 October 2010 was also accurate. He said although he is not the one who authored the court report, the report, however, captured what actually transpired during the court proceedings.
“The witness further confirmed that he wrote the article in exh 1 (i.e. Tears From The Heart). He did not find it problematic to write about an issue or threats that had already been made against him and, indeed, in a matter that was already in the public domain.
“On ‘funny characters in football’, the witness said he was qualified to describe people in charge of ‘our soccer’ and the public had a right to know what was happening in the administration of national soccer. He went on:
‘If you have a group of individuals mandated to run an institution as important as National Football and they employ a foreign coach and do not undertake to get him a work permit, and the coach is eventually deported, I think they fit the description of funny characters.’
“The witness said the remarks were not directly aimed at the plaintiff, in particular, but at the entire Zifa Board of which the plaintiff was a member. He said he had nothing personal against the plaintiff and had, after all, assisted him in his studies at some point.”
What The Honourable Judge Said In His Ruling
“Given the above issues, I believe that the first task in casu is to determine whether or not the words allegedly attributed to the plaintiff were ever uttered/said. The next step, if at all the words were uttered/said, would be to determine if the words themselves and the subsequent publication of same was wrongful and defamatory to the plaintiff.
“The plaintiff and his first two witnesses did not give the same evidence with respect to the distance that separated the plaintiff and the first defendant when the words were allegedly uttered. The plaintiff’s witnesses gave a distance of between 9 metres and 15 metres while the first defendant said he was one metre away from plaintiff.
“The plaintiff’s witnesses then went further to say they, themselves, were very close to the plaintiff so as to be able to hear whatever he might have said. They, thus, gave the impression that they, themselves, and not the first defendant, were close to the plaintiff. I deemed same to be deliberate lies.
“I must state, however, that, to a large extent, I agreed with the defendants that Riva and Antonio, who admitted being related, gave evidence which appeared to have been ‘rehearsed’. I DID NOT FIND BOTH OF THEM TO BE CREDIBLE WITNESSES. DESPITE APPARENT ‘COACHING’ THE TWO WITNESSES ALSO DIFFERED ON THE DISTANCES SEPARATING THE PLAINTIFF AND THE FIRST DEFENDANT. One gave a distance of 15 metres whilst the other gave a distance of between 16-18 metres.
“The first defendant, in my view, gave a credible story. As a journalist, he moved to the group where Gumede was being interviewed and it was not denied that other Board members, including the plaintiff, were part of that group. The first defendant said he was a meter away from the plaintiff who he knew very well. I believe that a metre away is a distance that would never militate against the first defendant’s hearing of whatever the plaintiff is alleged to have said.
“In making my observation in this matter, it is important to take into account, the following factors which existed at the material time (that the supporters of the national football team were not happy with the way the national team had performed against Cape Verde and the public were not happy with the way the Zifa Board had managed the affairs of the national team coaching department)
“The above factors lead me to the reasonable conclusion that, as a person who was heavily involved in the affairs of the Zifa Board, the probability that the plaintiff uttered the words is not a far-fetched conclusion. There was every reason to be angry with those involved in what appeared to be a hostile press, especially the first defendant, who runs a weekly column in the Sports Herald.
“I did not find the first defendant to be somebody carrying a vendetta against members of the Zifa Board and, worse still, against an individual member of the Zifa Board whom he had assisted in his studies. That fact was never refuted.
“I did not read a different story from the record of the lower court. The first defendant’s story, in my view, remained the same and intact even after extensive cross examination from plaintiff’s counsel. To that end, therefore, my finding in casu, on the balance of probabilities is that, the only inference I can draw from the evidence before me, is that the plaintiff uttered/said the words attributed to him.
“He was, in my view, an angry man and had every reason to be angry. The press was negative about Zifa and the National soccer team had failed to beat Cape Verde. HAVING MADE A FINDING THAT, ON A BALANCE OF PROBABILITIES, THE PLAINTIFF UTTERED THE WORDS; THAT THE FIRST DEFENDANT’S STORY WAS TRUE AND THAT THE SAME WAS PUBLISHED ACCURATELY BY THE SECOND DEFENDANT, THE ISSUE OF WRONGFUL PUBLICATION AND DEFAMATION FALLS AWAY, I BELIEVE THE SAME APPLIES TO THE REPORT ON COURT PROCEEDINGS.
“The plaintiff admitted that he is a public figure. I, therefore, want to believe that any member of society who accepts public office renders himself or herself to public scrutiny. The public has a right to fairly judge the performance of the holder of any public office. The only limitation is that any judgment or comment must remain fair and reasonable. It must also be based on true facts.
“The first defendant’s comments were directed at what was happening at Zifa, a Board charged with the administration of a national sport (soccer). In light of the situation that was obtaining at Zifa at the material time, I am of the view that, if the paragraphs complained of in ‘Tears From The Heart’ are read in the full context of the whole article, the defendants are entitled to the defence of fair comment.
“I believe the first defendant was making a fair comment on the unfortunate happenings at the Zifa Board and in the institution of national soccer in Zimbabwe. In view of the foregoing, I order as follows:-
1. THE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM IS DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY; AND
2. THE PLAINTIFF SHALL PAY COSTS  OF SUIT.”
Yes, finally, it’s all over and, as ABBA, told us the children of the ‘70s, “the judges will decide, the likes of me abide, spectators of the show, always staying low, the game is on again, a lover or a friend, a big thing or a small, the winner takes it all.”

To God Be The Glory!

Come on United !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Chicharitooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Text Feedback — 0772545199
WhatsApp Messenger – 0772545199
Email — [email protected]
Skype — sharuko58
Twitter — @Chakariboy

You can also interact with ROBSON SHARUKO on Facebook and Viber and on ZBC’s Game Plan weekly television football magazine programme on Monday nights or read his material in The Southern Times.