Mugabe's threats against Judge throws a challenge to Judge Chidyausiku to prove judiciary 'independence'

I would like to thank Bulawayo24 team for reproducing Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku's 10 January 2011 speech. The speech is as relevant today as it was back then because the core issues affecting the nation present then in 2011 are still there today. The nation needed to be reminded of the speech but none more so than the Chief Justice himself and those who continue to consider themselves to be above the law.

"RECENT media reports have placed under the spotlight issues relating to the doctrine of separation of powers and the need to refrain from commenting on matters that are sub judice or under consideration by the courts," started Chief Justice Chidyausiku.

Let us stop there and bring his speech to date with the present. Whilst it is noted that this was a quotation from a speech given by the Chief Justice in January 2011, there are nonetheless many parallels to what is happening today.
 
On the 3 March 2015 Mutasa and Gumbo submitted a Court Challenge of the legality of the Zanu PF December 2014 congress given its alleged disregard of the party and the nation's constitutional provisions. President Mugabe has since not only dismissed the case as having no merit but has gone on to reaffirm his overarching executive influence in the judiciary.

Mugabe has since publically and pointedly asked in "whose courts" the case would be heard and that he would question the "educational qualifications" of the judge who dares to hear the case.
Zimbabwe's Minister of Information, Professor Jonathan Moyo, has gone on to justify Mugabe's outrageous and blatant interference by the executive in the judiciary matters by claiming that Mutasa's case was "not a legal but are ideological and political" matter.
 
"We in the Judiciary regard the separation of powers as very critical and a sine qua non (an indispensable condition or qualification) for an independent and impartial Judiciary," said Chief Justice.

"The tenets of the doctrine are only meant to stop the Executive and the Legislature from interfering with the Judiciary and vice versa, but to keep each of the three arms of State separate from each other."

We could not agree with the Chief Justice more; we all want "an independent and impartial judiciary".
 
President Mugabe's blatant threats and the arrogance of Minister Moyo's comments put clear waters between the ideal independent judiciary the Chief Justice was talking about and the reality of Zimbabwe's highly politicized and jaundiced judiciary.

Let us put the merits and demerits of Mutasa's case to one side and just concentrate whether or not President is interfering with the judiciary in stating so blatantly that no judge should hear the case. The very fact that he made such a public threat on two separate occasions removes all fig-leaf pretence that Zimbabwe has an independent judiciary.

"Our constitutional mandate is to interpret the law and apply the law to the cases that come before us," said Chief Justice. "We provide legal solutions to legal problems."

Well, the nation is now looking up to Chief Justice Chidyausiku to restate the judiciary independence and prerogative to hear Mr Mutasa and Mr Gumbo case like every other legal matter brought before the Court. The Judge must publicly dismiss the nonsense that this case is not a legal one but "an ideological and political", whatever that is supposed to mean.

Indeed given the critical importance of this case in the nation's fight for an independent and impartial judiciary, Chief Justice Chidyausiku would be wise to appoint the most senior judge(s) to handle this case or better still handle the case himself.

Of course Zimbabwe does not have an independent and impartial judiciary. For years people like Chief Justice Chidyausiku have used their high office to pontificate about "independent and impartial judiciary" and how this is important for "a functional democracy" as if the country already HAS such a judiciary already and they are just defending it.

Zimbabwe does not have an independent and impartial judiciary precisely because the Executive branch has excessive powers in the appointment, firing, rewarding of judges, etc. making it impossible to have an independent judiciary. It is little wonder that Mugabe should be talking of the Courts and Judges as if he "owns" them.

One of the democratic reforms agreed in the 2008 Global Political Agreement (GPA) was to carry out various reforms designed to sever the executive powers and controls over the judiciary. Sadly not even one of these reforms were ever carried out and hence the judiciary has remained, like many other public institutions like the Public Media, the Police, etc., Mugabe's person properties to serve his dictatorial whims above all else.

Zimbabwe is facing an unprecedented economic and political crisis which has resulted in the economic meltdown sending unemployment soaring to 90% plus and forcing 16% or 2 million into abject poverty. Zanu PF's own economic recovery plan, ZimAsset, is dead in the water because it failed to attract the required donor funding and foreign direct investment. The economic meltdown is set to get worse, not better, as long as Zanu PF remains in power.

On the political front Zanu PF is imploding and hence the dog-eat-dog fighting that has broken out in the party. The root cause of the Mutasa case is the infighting within the party.

Zimbabwe's economic and political situation cannot continue; it is economically and politically unsustainable. It is important for those who part and parcel of Zimbabwe's repressive political system, people like Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku, realize that the system must change. By threaten the judge who dares hear Mutasa's case Mugabe has inadvertently thrown the gauntlet on Chief Justice himself to prove Zimbabwe's judiciary is anywhere near as "independent and impartial" as he made it to be in his 10 January 2011 speech!