Chimombe, Mpofu seek delay in sentencing

There was drama at the High Court on Monday when businessmen and Zanu-PF members Mike Chimombe and Moses Mpofu attempted to delay their sentencing, arguing that they had not been furnished with a written copy of the judgment needed to prepare their mitigation submissions.

The duo, who were recently convicted of defrauding the government of US$7 million in the botched Presidential Goats Scheme, made the last-minute application through their lawyer, Professor Lovemore Madhuku, just hours before sentencing was expected.

Madhuku argued that proceeding without the written judgment would prejudice his clients.

"The accused's position is that without sight of the written judgement, they will be unable to do proper mitigation and respond adequately," he told the court.

"The disadvantages the accused will face in the absence of the written judgement will be more. They did not take down notes when the judgement was delivered, and we need to afford them the opportunity to read it and give instructions to their lawyers."

He said the request was grounded in the defendants' constitutional right to a fair trial, arguing that sentencing guidelines require reference to the judgment.

However, the State - represented by prosecutor Whisper Mabhaudhi - strongly opposed the attempt, describing it as "misplaced" and lacking legal basis.

"The only available application by accused persons convicted by the High Court is provided for in section 4 of the sentencing guidelines, and this particular application does not fall under that," Mabhaudhi said.
"The judgement was delivered in open court, and parties were advised to take notes. There was no undertaking that a written judgement would be provided before sentencing."

He insisted that the absence of a written judgment should not halt proceedings.

"The applicants do not require the judgement beyond confirming what was read. This is a matter of preference being disguised as a right. In the absence of a written judgement, this application cannot detain the court."

Madhuku, in his reply, took issue with suggestions that his clients should rely on the livestreamed court proceedings.

"The State is directing us to go and watch YouTube for the judgment, but my clients do not have access to YouTube," he said.

"We are only seeking a stay of pre-sentencing pending availability of the written judgment. We are not challenging the conviction."

Justice Pisirayi Kwenda postponed the matter to after lunch today, setting the stage for either sentencing to proceed or for a fresh legal battle over the availability of the judgment.