The law firm of choice for internationally focused companies

+263 242 744 677

admin@tsazim.com

4 Gunhill Avenue,

Harare, Zimbabwe

Businessman files complaint against Harare magistrate for ‘gross bias’

HARARE

A
Harare
businessman
has
filed
a
complaint
against
Harare
magistrate
Lynne
Chinzou
accusing
her
of
“gross
bias”
in
her
handling
of
a
forgery
trial
involving
his
former
employee.

The
businessman,
Skhumbuzo
Manduna
and
his
company,
Andiswe
Phakade
(Pvt)
Ltd
trading
as
AP
Carriers,
had
taken
Elias
Masora,
who
was
a
company
driver,
to
court
accusing
him
of
forging
a
defensive
driving
certificate.

However,
following
trial,
Musora
was
acquitted
with
the
magistrate
citing
insufficient
evidence
to
prove
the
charge
beyond
reasonable
doubt.

Musora,
while
still
employed
by
the
company,
allegedly
got
involved
in
theft
of
1,200
litres
of
diesel
within
a
month
of
his
hiring,
which
prompted
Manduna
to
scrutinise
his
employment
credentials.


The
theft
case
is
pending
at
Mbare
Magistrates’
Court.

Manduna
feels
the
magistrate
did
not
handle
the
forgery
case
well
enough.

“The
above-mentioned
subject
matter
refers
in
terms
of
which
we
are
formally
writing
to
your
office
laying
a
complaint
pertaining
to
the
gross
bias
demonstrated
by
the
magistrate
in
the
manner
she
presided
over
the
matter
S
v
Elias
Masora,”
reads
the
letter,
dated
12
September
2024,
and
addressed
to
the
Chief
Magistrate.

“In
her
judgement,
the
magistrate
contended
that
Elias
Masora
disclosed
to
the
company
that
he
didn’t
have
a
defensive
driving
certificate;
this
assertion
defies
all
logic
because
for
anyone
to
apply
for
a
position
of
truck
driver,
you
ought
to
be
in
possession
of
a
defensive
certificate.

“It
is
inconceivable
that
the
accused
approached
a
company
soliciting
for
a
job,
disclosed
to
the
company
that
he
doesn’t
hold
the
required
documents
for
the
job
and
still
went
on
to
be
hired.

“Truck
driving
is
not
a
specialist
skill
such
that
a
company
can
risk
to
forego
any
requirement
as
far
as
recruitment
of
a
truck
driver
is
concerned.

“It
is
evident
here
that
the
magistrate
ought
to
have
applied
her
mind.”

The
State’s
case
relied
on
a
single
witness,
the
complainant,
who
testified
that
Masora
had
furnished
a
fake
document
during
the
hiring
process.

However,
the
court
noted
that
neither
the
original
defensive
certificate
nor
the
request
letter
to
the
Traffic
Safety
Council
of
Zimbabwe
was
tendered
as
part
of
the
evidence.

Furthermore,
the
court
questioned
the
authenticity
of
a
letter
from
the
Traffic
Safety
Council
of
Zimbabwe,
dated
March
20,
2024,
which
had
a
date
stamp
of
March
19,
2024.

It
stated
that
Masora
‘s
defensive
driving
certificate
had
expired
on
24
February
2019.

The
court
also
noted
that
the
key
witness,
the
Human
Resources
Manager
who
hired
Masora,
was
not
called
to
testify.

Manduna
said
magistrate
Chinzou
demonstrated
bias
in
her
judgment.

In
her
ruling,
Chinzou
queried
the
police’s
decision
to
write
to
the
Traffic
Safety
Council
of
Zimbabwe,
which
Manduna
argues
was
within
the
police’s
discretionary
powers.

He
further
contends
that
she
expressed
doubts
about
the
authenticity
of
a
letter
from
the
Traffic
Safety
Council
of
Zimbabwe
without
subpoenaing
a
witness
to
clarify.

Manduna
also
raised
concerns
about
the
delay
in
accessing
the
court
record
and
the
circumstances
under
which
it
was
finally
obtained
citing
that
the
record
took
two
months
in
the
magistrate
office
before
it
could
be
accessed.

He
alleges
Magistrate
Chinzou
was
“clutching
at
straws”
to
secure
an
acquittal
for
Masora
and
urges
consideration
of
the
complaint.