POLITICAL DETAINEES jailed PENDING TRIAL

The state, led by Law Officer Michael Mugabe, then requested the court
to have all the accused persons committed to prison in terms of section
66 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act.

Defence lawyers argued that the Magistrates’ Court did not have the
capacity to revoke bail, as bail in relation to the political detainees
was granted as a result of negotiations by the Joint Monitoring and
Implementation Committee (JOMIC) and a settlement reached by the three
political parties and communicated to the lawyers through the office of
the Attorney General.

Mr. Tokwe of the AG’s office had indicated to defence lawyers that bail
was supposed to run right up to the trial of the detainees. Due to the
peculiar circumstances surrounding the admission of the political
detainees on bail, Magistrate Chimwanda agreed that she should hear
evidence relating to this agreement and court was adjourned to Tuesday
5 May

2009 to allow lawyers to call Mr. Tokwe and two members of JOMIC to testify in this regard.

On 5 May 2009, Magistrate Chimwanda stopped this process in its tracks,
and ruled that she did not have the jurisdiction to consider the issue
of bail continuing in spite of the indictment. She stated that
jurisdiction lay with the High Court. She refused outright to consider
the remainder of the evidence, and gave no further reasons for changing
her ruling of 4 May 2009 (that evidence would continue to be led the
following day in order for a decision to be made in relation to bail
for the political detainees). She went on to refuse to entertain
further submissions on behalf of the detainees and committed all the
detainees back into prison.

Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) remains totally astonished and
bemused at this latest turn of events. The fact that the AG’s office is
pursuing the revocation of bail despite the agreement which had been
reached, smacks of bad faith. The magistrate should have considered all
the evidence placed before the court in relation to this agreement on
bail before rendering a decision – the process which had commenced on 4
May 2009.

For the magistrate overnight to make a decision to refuse to hear
further evidence effectively stifled the defence, on behalf of the
political detainees, from being heard. This is a disturbing violation
of the fundamental right of an accused person to be heard. Further, the
right to liberty is a fundamental right which is protected in the
Constitution of Zimbabwe. Arbitrary deprivation of such right should
not occur. All the political detainees have been complying with their
stringent and onerous bail conditions and not one has defaulted since
bail was granted. It is our considered view that this could and should
have been taken into account by the court along with the political
agreement which had been reached.

ZLHR, from the onset of court proceedings in late December 2008 has
maintained that, where the institutions which deliver justice are fair,
independent and impartial, and dispense their mandate without fear or
favour, charges based on evidence which has been extracted as a result
of abduction/enforced disappearance, and torture – both of which are
prohibited in terms of international law – would never be admitted. The
political detainees would not be before such courts, and any attempt to
suggest that "the law should be allowed to take its course" would be
misplaced. Abductors and torturers would not remain at large. They
would have been questioned and held to account where their identities
were known. This is not the case for these 15 individuals, who we
maintain remain wrongly before the courts, who have been and continue
to be let down by protective institutions in Zimbabwe, and who continue
to remain pawns in political games.

It is now clear that the justice delivery system has completely failed
to protect the basic rights of these political detainees, and no matter
how many legal processes are initiated and pursued, unless these
processes are considered by professional and independent institutions,
complimented by political will and respect for the rule of law, these
individuals and others will continue to remain unprotected and exposed
to such types of miscarriages of justice and abuse of the judicial
process.

Affected Individuals

1. Jestina Mukoko

2. Broderick Takawira

3. Audrey Zimbudzana

4. Regis Mujeyi

5. Mapfumo Garutsa

6. Chinoto Mukwezaramba Zulu

7. Zacharia Nkomo

8. Gandi Mudzingwa

9. Kisimusi Chris Dlamini

10. Andrison Manyere

11. Concilia Chinanzvavana

12. Manuel Chinanzvavana

13. Violet Mupfuranhewe

14. Collen Mutemagau

15. Fidelis Chiramba