Prophet Magaya prosecutor axed

The Prosecutor General has acceded to a request by Prophetic Healing and Deliverance (PHD) Ministries leader Walter Magaya to remove Harare Provincial Chief Director Tendai Shonhayi from handling his ongoing rape trial, citing concerns over alleged religious bias.

Magaya, through his lawyers Admire Rubaya and Everson Chatambudza, wrote to the Prosecutor General on February 17 arguing that Shonhayi is a member of a rival church, the United Family International Church (UFIC), led by Emmanuel Makandiwa.

The defence claimed that her alleged affiliation would compromise her impartiality in prosecuting the matter.

During proceedings today, Shonhayi was absent from the bench, with prosecutor Catherine Munyeriwa taking over, indicating that the request for recusal had been granted.

In their letter, Magaya's legal team argued that Shonhayi's alleged membership in a rival church would affect her professional judgment and render the trial unfair. They alleged she was pursuing a personal agenda aimed at "destroying him and his church."

The lawyers cited several developments they say demonstrate partiality, including the decision to have the matter transferred to the Victim Friendly Unit during Monday's proceedings. They also referenced bail proceedings at the High Court, alleging that Shonhayi had sought the recusal of a judge in that process.

Further allegations included claims that she prepared the charge sheet and, at one point, attempted to serve Magaya with court papers that did not include the names of the alleged victims.

"It is the client's contention that Ms Shonhayi is not impartial in this matter as required by the law for a prosecutor. She clearly has a personal agenda emanating from her personal hatred against both the accused person and his church," the lawyers wrote.

"It is our client's considered view that Ms Shonhayi is conflicted and should be recused from the matter."

Meanwhile, the court is seized with Magaya's application to have the case referred to the Constitutional Court. The move follows a magistrate's ruling granting the State's application for the matter to be heard in camera.

Prosecutors argued that the complainants had reservations about testifying in open court while facing Magaya. However, the defence challenged the decision, contending that hearing testimony through intermediaries would prejudice the accused.

In their application for referral to the apex court, the defence argued that constitutional issues arose from the magistrate's decision, alleging that the court relied on submissions from the State without independently interviewing the witnesses before determining their vulnerability.