FORMER Local Government minister Saviour Kasukuwerehas
petitioned the High Court, accusing regional magistrate Hoseah Mujaya of being
biased in the manner he has been handling his court case.
Kasukuwere is facing charges of abuse of office in the
parcelling out of land when he was still a Cabinet minister.
His petition comes after Mujaya dismissed the former
minister’s application for exception to the four criminal charges he is facing.
Through his lawyers, Chinyama and Partners, the former
minister said Mujaya failed to properly consider his application in which he
was seeking to be absolved from any wrongdoing since the charges preferred
against him did not disclose any offence.
He argued that his actions were a bona fide exercise of
administrative power and authority.
“…The above shows clearly that what was being peddled as a
criminal offence was a bona fide exercise of administrative power and
authority. It could not amount to any criminal offence in any
circumstances….the decision of the first respondent (Mujaya) can never be
sustained,” Kasukuwere said.
“It was so grossly outrageous in its defiance of logic to
the extent that it is reviewable. Any reasonable magistrate who would have
applied his mind to the facts would have noticed that in fact, no essential
element of the offences had been established.”
He added: “From a consideration of the ruling, it is
apparent that the first respondent did not address the fact that the charges
preferred against me did not disclose an offence in the absence of a statement
of what duties I am alleged to have breached.
“Undoubtedly, the first respondent was biased and showed
interest in the proceedings.”
To buttress his application, Kasukuwere further said Mujaya
spent a large portion of his ruling addressing the sufficiency or otherwise of
the notice given to the State and mischaracterised the arguments made by his
lawyer, Charles Chinyama.
“He (Mujaya) states that the State lined up witnesses whose
evidence looks relevant to the matter on hand. I do not know how the magistrate
looked at the evidence from witnesses who have not yet testified and before I
have been asked to plead to the charges,” Kasukuwere argued.
“His statement that the evidence looks relevant to the
matter on hand amounts to an assessment of evidence which has not been led. It
means the trial of the matter will be farcical… If he had applied his mind to
the exception, he would have noticed that the exception does not raise triable
issues. It simply questions the validity of the charges.
“…secondly, the first respondent confessed, during the proceedings
that he was operating under pressure on at least two occasions. In doing so,
the honourable magistrate breached his constitutional duties and the Judicial
Code of Ethics; that being so, the proceedings were vitiated and must be set
aside.”
Kasukuwere also challenged the National Prosecuting
Authority’s decision to invite a Harare lawyer Zivanai Macharaga to prosecute
the matter as a specially appointed prosecutor.
The matter is pending. Newsday
0 comments:
Post a Comment