|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Index of articles on enforced disappearances in Zimbabwe
State
concedes Mukoko was abducted
MISA-Zimbabwe
June 25, 2009
Former news reader with
the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC) and director of the
Zimbabwe Peace Project, Jestina Mukoko, on 25 June 2009 appeared
before the full bench of the Supreme Court sitting as a Constitutional
Court challenging the infringement of her constitutional rights
to liberty, full protection of the law and right to freedom from
torture. The full bench comprised Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku,
Justice Luke Malaba, Justice Wilson Sandura, and Justice Vernanda
Ziyambi.
Mukoko who is being charged
with banditry, sabotage and terrorism, was granted bail after 92-days
of detention following her abduction from her home in Norton on
the outskirts of Harare on 3 December 2008. Her whereabouts were
unknown until her subsequent appearance in court on 24 December
2008. Thereafter, Mukoko waged numerous court battles for her freedom
until her subsequent committal to bail on 6 May 2009.
State prosecutors conceded
in court that security agents had abducted and illegally detained
Mukoko who is asking the Supreme Court to stop her prosecution on
terrorism charges. Her lawyer Jeremy Gauntlet told a full bench
of the Supreme Court that Mukoko's rights had been grossly violated,
including by being denied medication and a lawyer, and by being
kept in solitary confinement.
"The process [of
her arrest] is so contaminated that you should order a stay of prosecution,"
Gauntlet told the court, adding that prosecutors were solely relying
on evidence extracted from Mukoko during torture to prosecute her.
State prosecutor Fatima Maxwell, in response to a question from
Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku, said the state did not dispute
Mukoko's evidence and had not questioned the security agents who
had abducted her. Asked if she was conceding that Mukoko's abduction
and detention were illegal, Maxwell told the court: "Yes my
Lord."
Advocate Gauntlet chronicled
Mukoko's ordeal during the period of her detention until she was
subsequently handed over to the police. The advocate argued that
during the period in question state security agents had acted in
complicity with the police as evidenced by the fact that when she
was finally handed over to the police, the police were actually
given material which had purportedly been extracted from her as
evidence.
Advocate Gauntlet further
challenged the state to show to the court any law which grants state
security agents the power or mandated them to act in such a manner.
He further argued that given the extremity of the violations of
the applicant's rights, the only fitting remedy would be a permanent
stay of the proceedings and the award of an order for costs to Mukoko
on a special scale.
He noted nine points
which in his view warranted a finding in Mukoko's favour notably
that:
- there was no warrant
of arrest
- subjection to inhuman
and degrading treatment
- unlawful detention
- solitary confinement
- torture
- threats of harm
- deprivation of medical
care
- deprivation of access
to a lawyer
- cumulative connivance
between the police and state security agents.
The State represented
by Fatima Maxwell, did not dispute these allegations, but dwelt
on inconsistencies in the accounts of what transpired. However,
the Chief Justice who was supported by Justice Malaba, noted that
the inconsistencies were irrelevant but that the major question
was whether or not the violations alleged constituted an infringement
of Mukoko's constitutional rights. Quizzed on this point the state
conceded that the violations indeed constituted an infringement
on the applicant's Bill of Rights. Chief Justice Chidyausiku reserved
judgment indefinitely.
Visit
the MISA-Zimbabwe 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
|
