Back to Index

Justice Paradza trial observation
Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR)
March 08, 2006

Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) attended at the High Court where the decision as to whether Justice Paradza could be sentenced in his absence or not was made. The charges arose from allegations of Justice Paradza having contravened sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act and obstruction of justice, in that he sought to influence the opinions and decision of a presiding judge on matter which involved one of Justice Paradza's business associate. Justice Paradza whose whereabouts are at present unknown, was due for sentencing when he failed to attend court. Justice Mutambanegwe a retired judge of High Court of Zimbabwe and currently a judge of the Supreme Court of Namibia presided over the matter and held that Justice Paradza could be sentenced in absentia.

In summary, the basis of his argument was that the administration of justice could not be impeded by a person who chose to waive his right to be present during the proceedings. This being held in light of the fact that Section 18 of the Constitution (and Section 194 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act) is silent on what the court ought to do in such circumstances. Justice Mutambanengwe stated that he did not want to place an unduly restricted interpretation on these limitations in such a manner as to exclude the current circumstances as that would he felt it needlessly impede upon the administration of justice.

Counsel for Justice Paradza, Advocate Eric Matinenga, found himself in the unfortunate position of having to make submissions without having received instructions from his client and therefore could not make submissions on Justice Paradza's personal circumstances. When the judge raised the issue of the sentencing options in terms of the Prevention of Corruption Act, being a maximum 5 year imprisonment term or a sum on which there was some doubt by the court and both counsel). Advocate Matinenga again noted that he could not submit on an acceptable fine as he had no idea what Justice Paradza could afford or be willing to pay. The matter was adjourned to the 9th of March 2006.

Visit the ZLHR fact sheet

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP