
The same magistrate issued the first warrant on February 12
this year, but the High Court stopped its execution on February 16. ZACC
successfully applied for a fresh warrant, which was issued on February 19 this
year.
The UZ says it got wind of the new search warrant on March
7. In a bid to block the execution of the warrant, the UZ’s lawyers
Chihambakwe, Mutizwa & Partners, filed an urgent chamber application
seeking nullification of the document.
The High Court is yet to set the matter down for hearing. Mr
Singano directed the registrar or any other senior official at the UZ to
provide a set of relevant documents, records and articles to the investigators.
The documents include Mrs Mugabe’s pre-registration
application form, her research proposal submitted to the Department of
Sociology, minutes of departmental board assigning a supervisor to Mrs Mugabe,
academic certificates of her supervisor, minutes showing that the doctoral
degree passed through the academic committee, and minutes of the UZ Senate
recommending to the University Council the conferment of the doctorate to Mrs
Mugabe.
Mr Singano also directed the university to allow ZACC
access to minutes of the University Council recommending to the University
Chancellor the conferment of the doctorate to Mrs Mugabe, copies of progress
reports at Post Graduate Centre, copies of contract of research assistant and
contract of teaching assistant in respect of Mr Justice Tandire.
ZACC must also be furnished with the UZ Faculty Ordinance
number 44, UZ quality assurance guidelines and benchmarks for management and
supervision of higher degrees by research, General Academic Regulations for
Post-Graduate Degrees of the university of Zimbabwe 1998/99 Volume 11, as well
as copies of the transcript, notification and Doctor of Philosophy Degree
awarded to Mrs Mugabe.
In the urgent chamber application filed at the High Court
on Thursday, the UZ argued the warrant of search and seizure was invalid. The
affidavit relied upon by ZACC when applying for the warrant was fraught with
inconsistencies, it said.
“From paragraphs 5,6,7, 8 and 9 of the affidavit, it is alleged
that the accused person acted without knowledge and approval of various UZ
officials, bodies and councils but the warrant seeks, in bulletin points 9,12,
13,14 and 15 to paragraph 13, minutes of meetings of the officials, bodies, and
councils approving the process in which it is alleged that the accused acted
without knowledge and approval,” reads the application.
The UZ also argued that the commissioning of the affidavit
was questionable, rendering it defective and invalid.
“The person who signed as commissioner of oaths has a stamp
which is not that of a commissioner of oaths,” reads the application.
“The stamp merely states that the person who signed is the
officer-in-charge at Avondale Police Station. Further, the signing of an
affidavit deposed to by a member of the ZRP by an alleged commissioner of oaths
who is a member of the ZRP is a violation of Section 2(1) of the Justices of
Peace and Commissioners of Oaths (General) Regulations, 1998 (SIB 183/1998).
“There is therefore no properly commissioned affidavit upon
which the warrant could have been issued.” Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment