Prophet Magaya lawyers argue ConCourt referral bid

Prophetic Healing and Deliverance Ministries leader Walter Magaya, who is facing rape allegations, has launched a legal challenge seeking to have his prosecution referred to the Constitutional Court, arguing that the case is unconstitutional and based on what he calls "tainted" evidence.

Through his lawyers Admire Rubaya and Everson Chatambudza, Magaya contends that the State is pursuing a conviction without sufficient legal grounds and has allegedly relied on "fabricated" or improperly handled evidence.

The defence argues that the prosecution is proceeding despite the withdrawal of one complainant and claims that the case lacks key evidentiary foundations, including medical affidavits and corroborating statements.

They further allege that prosecutors and investigating officers improperly altered witness statements, including one from a complainant based in Ireland, and acted outside their mandate by interfering with investigative processes.

"The applicant has the right to be given adequate facilities to prepare a defence," the lawyers argued, adding that failure to disclose DNA test results obtained during investigations violates Magaya's right to a fair trial.

The defence also claims Magaya was subjected to DNA collection while in custody without his legal representatives present and says the State has not disclosed the results or explained their status.

They argue that proceeding to trial without a complainant and supporting evidence amounts to an abuse of court process and a violation of constitutional protections.

"A complaint of rape originates from a complainant, while a charge originates from the State," the lawyers submitted, arguing that without a complainant the prosecution cannot proceed meaningfully.

They also questioned the legitimacy of continuing with a case where an alleged victim has withdrawn, describing the move as forcing a complainant to testify against her will.

The State, however, has rejected the application, describing it as "frivolous and vexatious" and intended to delay proceedings. Prosecutors argue that the issues raised by Magaya can be properly tested during trial through cross-examination.

State representatives maintained that the Prosecutor General has the authority to decide which cases proceed to trial and insisted there is no constitutional basis to halt the prosecution.

They also defended the handling of the case, arguing that any procedural concerns raised by the defence do not invalidate the trial process.

Magistrate Francis Mapfumo is expected to rule on the application on May 29, 2026, in a case that continues to attract significant public and legal attention.