suspension in February last year to the official date of expiration of the contract in April next year.
Arbitrator, Caleb Mucheche, last year ruled that the indefinite suspension of Mapeza on allegations of match-fixing was illegal and directed the parties to agree on the quantification of the outstanding payments.
After the parties failed to agree, Mapeza took the case back to Mucheche for quantification. Mucheche on Wednesday ordered Zifa to pay the money.
“The respondent (Zifa) is hereby ordered to pay the claimant the net sum of US$243 546,52 as damages with interest thereon at the rate of 5 percent per annum with effect from October 25, 2012, to the date of full payment.
“The respondent shall pay the claimant arbitration and legal costs on the scale of legal practitioner-client using the prevailing Law Society of Zimbabwe tariffs,” ruled Mucheche.
Kantor and Immerman law firm represented Mapeza while Ralph Maganga of Maganga and Company acted for Zifa.
Arrear salaries for the period stretching from February 2012 to October 2012 were pegged at US$94 071 while damages for the unexpired period of contract from November 2012 to March 2014 was calculated as US$89 146,30. Contract fees for the unexpired period of contract was US$42 500 while school fees allowances for the unexpired period of contract was pegged at US$7 240.
Leave days were converted into US$7 189,22 while Zifa should pay US$3 400 in outstanding housing allowance.
It was Mucheche’s finding that Mapeza’s suspension, effected before Zifa properly carried out investigations into the Asiagate scandal, was mockery of an exercise and the association had “treaded a legal minefield with reckless abandon”.
Mucheche said Zifa subjected Mapeza to treatment that could only be expected in hell and the association’’s actions, or lack of it, after the coach’s suspension gave credibility to the adage that justice delayed was justice denied.
Mucheche said Zifa “flagrantly, wantonly and bazenly violated Mapeza’’s labour rights with impunity” and left the coach vulnerable to be “tried, convicted and sentenced by the media without an opportunity to be heard in sync with the fundamental tenets of natural justice embedded in audi alteram paterm rule.”
Mapeza’s battle for redemption, Mucheche said, resembled the “deep agony of a victim of naked injustice at the hands of spineless, heartless and cruel taskmaster . . . ”.