A doctor who faced the possibility of going to jail

For the past five years, Dr Michael Mandaza has lived under the shadow of a criminal prosecution that threatened his freedom, professional standing and reputation.

The owner of Pacific 24 Hours Hospital in Mabvuku was facing two counts of fraud after being accused of fabricating laboratory test results for patients at his facility — allegations that, if proven, could have led to a prison sentence, deregistration and lasting humiliation.

However, the long-running case came to an end after the High Court acquitted Dr Mandaza on both counts, ruling that the State had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

Dr Mandaza had been accused of falsifying renal function test results for two patients, Sandra Bed and Simbisai Chisuwe, in incidents alleged to have occurred in May 2020 and February 2021 respectively.

According to the State, Dr Mandaza misrepresented to both patients that their blood samples would be sent to a registered medical laboratory for testing. Instead, prosecutors alleged, he generated fictitious computer-based results using his laptop, endorsed them on a non-existent laboratory letterhead and authenticated them with a date stamp allegedly found at his hospital.

Investigators from the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) raided Pacific 24 Hours Hospital, seizing about 40,000 patient files as part of the probe. Out of those files, only three were said to have contained allegedly fake results.

In his defence outline, Dr Mandaza denied making any misrepresentations to the complainants. He maintained that the case was fabricated by enemies and disgruntled former employees who falsely reported him to ZACC and the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority (ZIMRA).

During the trial, complainant Sandra Bed testified that she was summoned by ZACC officers and informed that she had been issued with fake results. However, she told the court she was never shown the specific results in question. She further stated that Dr Mandaza had been her doctor for a long time and had always acted professionally.

Shepherd Gumiro, representing the Health Professions Authority, testified that he was asked by ZACC to verify the existence of a laboratory allegedly operating along Robson Manyika Avenue. He said checks revealed that the laboratory was not registered.

Another Health Professions Authority inspector, Fungai Makotore, told the court that officials visited Dr Mandaza's residential and business premises, where patient files, expired medicines and a stamp were confiscated. She said the stamp bore an address that could not be traced, raising suspicion.

However, under cross-examination, Makotore conceded that she did not personally witness the recovery of the stamp and only learnt of it from colleagues, casting doubt on how it was seized.

ZACC principal investigating officer Shingai Mudede testified that he received a tip-off about alleged malpractice at the hospital, leading to the seizure of patient files. He said three files matched the allegations and that further investigations suggested the results originated from a non-existent laboratory. Mudede also claimed that forensic evidence retrieved from a laptop supported the allegations, although the documents were not produced in court.

Dr Mandaza told the court that the tip-off was motivated by former employees he had dismissed. He denied any knowledge of the stamp and said the cabinet locks had been changed without his knowledge. He also argued that the files were in ZACC's custody for nearly three months, during which time they could have been tampered with.

Former hospital employee Grace Mbaimbai testified that the stamp in question was kept in a public area accessible to all staff and was not assigned to any specific doctor.

In delivering judgment, Justice Hungwe emphasised that the burden of proof in criminal cases rests squarely on the State.

"The State bears the onus to prove the guilt of an accused beyond reasonable doubt," the judge said, adding that the court should not be left guessing whether an offence was committed or by whom.

Justice Hungwe ruled that the State failed to link Dr Mandaza to the alleged manufacture of fake results. He noted that there was no evidence explaining why the stamp was attributed to the accused, nor was there evidence excluding the possibility that another employee could have been responsible.

The court further criticised the failure to tender the allegedly fake documents as evidence and raised concerns about the chain of custody of the seized patient files, saying the State did not demonstrate how tampering was ruled out.

"The accused defence seems probable and the State was unable to disprove it," Justice Hungwe said.

"In the circumstances, the State failed to discharge its onus and the accused is hereby found not guilty and acquitted in both counts."

The ruling brings to an end a case that had hung over Dr Mandaza for five years, closing a chapter marked by uncertainty, scrutiny and the threat of professional ruin.