News / National
Malaika takes Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe dethronement to High Court
2 hrs ago |
24 Views
The dispute between the Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe organisation and dethroned pageant queen Malaika Mushandu has escalated into a legal battle, with her lawyers asking the High Court to overturn her dethronement and restore her as Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026.
Mushandu was stripped of the title just 11 days into her reign after the organisation announced on August 22 that her tenure had been terminated.
In a statement signed by Joshua Taderera, a member of the Miss Universe Zimbabwe selection committee, the organisation cited alleged misconduct and ineligibility, claiming that Mushandu had failed to meet the required standards and contractual obligations of both Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe and the international Miss Cosmo organisation.
Mushandu initially remained silent following the announcement, but has now challenged the decision in court.
Her court application, filed at the High Court of Zimbabwe in Harare on August 26, argues that the process leading to her dethronement was procedurally flawed and violated fundamental principles of natural justice.
According to Mushandu, she was crowned Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026 on June 6 and was subsequently called to what she understood to be an ordinary meeting. She says she later discovered that the meeting was, in fact, a disciplinary hearing concerning allegations that she had left the stage prematurely after her coronation and subsequently became unavailable.
Mushandu said she had informed the organisation that she would temporarily be unavailable because she was travelling to Victoria Falls on business and had authorised the organisation to communicate with her manager during the period when she might have limited access to communications.
She said that, upon her return, her manager informed her that Tendai Bongani Hunda had raised concerns about her and that a meeting had been scheduled for July 3.
Mushandu said her lawyers subsequently wrote to the organisation after neither her manager nor legal representatives had been informed of the nature or purpose of the meeting.
She said her lawyers had made it clear that if disciplinary proceedings were being contemplated, she expected to be given adequate notice of the allegations, sufficient time to prepare and an opportunity to be legally represented.
According to Mushandu, Patience Lusengo assured her that the meeting was not a disciplinary hearing.
"Patience Lusengo assured me that the meeting was not intended to constitute a disciplinary hearing. Trusting in that assurance, I attended the meeting in good faith," Mushandu said in her court papers.
She alleges that the assurance was misleading and that the meeting subsequently became a disciplinary proceeding without her being properly informed.
"The assurance proved illusory. What had been presented as an ordinary meeting was, in truth, a disciplinary enquiry concealed beneath the guise of a meeting," she said.
Mushandu argues that she was never formally informed that disciplinary proceedings had commenced or that she faced the possibility of losing her title.
She also denies the allegations against her and says she was not given a proper opportunity to respond to them.
"Those allegations are wholly denied. More importantly, I was never afforded a proper opportunity to address them on their merits," she said.
According to the court filing, Mushandu was not presented with evidence supporting the allegations, nor was she given an opportunity to challenge evidence or call witnesses.
She said she only discovered that the meeting had been treated as a disciplinary hearing when she received the written determination revoking her title.
"It was only upon receipt of the determination that the true nature of the meeting was revealed," she said.
"Thus, the first notice I received that I had stood trial was the letter informing me that judgement had already been given against me."
Mushandu argues that the process breached the audi alteram partem principle, which requires a person affected by an adverse decision to be given a fair opportunity to be heard.
She also told the court that the loss of the title could not be assessed solely in financial terms because of the impact it could have on her professional reputation and modelling career.
Mushandu has a long history in modelling and pageantry. She told the court that she became the youngest person to be crowned Miss Zimbabwe in 2011 and subsequently represented Zimbabwe at international competitions, including Miss World 2011, where she reached the top 10, and Top Model of the World 2012, where she was first runner-up.
She also cited her victory at World Supermodel International among her previous achievements.
"My crowning as Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026 was therefore not merely the acquisition of a title, but the continuation of a long-standing career and reputation built upon pageantry, modelling and public representation," she said.
She argued that the title carried prestige, publicity, professional standing, branding opportunities and the opportunity to represent Zimbabwe internationally.
"These intangible benefits are central to the value of the title and, by their very nature, cannot only be adequately quantified in monetary terms," she said.
Following the decision to revoke her title, Mushandu's lawyers wrote to the respondents on July 28, challenging what they described as procedural irregularities and demanding that she be reinstated.
She said the respondents had not substantively responded to the concerns raised in the letter or taken steps to reverse the decision.
"Their silence has left standing, a determination reached through a process lacking in fairness and contrary to the principles of justice," Mushandu said.
She has now asked the High Court to intervene and set aside the decision revoking her title.
The respondents listed in the court application include the Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe organisation, Tendai Bongani Hunda, Joshua Taderera, Simbarashe Chinyemba, Denny Marandure, Patience Lusengo, Apphia Musavengana, Zodwa Mnkandla, Danya Kabwebwe, Tafadzwa Zimoyo, Kevin Zhou, Jane Mutamangira and Gracious Matara.
If successful, Mushandu's application could result in the dethronement decision being set aside and potentially pave the way for her reinstatement as Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026.
The matter now shifts the bitter pageant dispute from public debate to formal judicial scrutiny, where the circumstances surrounding Mushandu's dethronement and the fairness of the disciplinary process will be tested before the High Court.
Mushandu was stripped of the title just 11 days into her reign after the organisation announced on August 22 that her tenure had been terminated.
In a statement signed by Joshua Taderera, a member of the Miss Universe Zimbabwe selection committee, the organisation cited alleged misconduct and ineligibility, claiming that Mushandu had failed to meet the required standards and contractual obligations of both Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe and the international Miss Cosmo organisation.
Mushandu initially remained silent following the announcement, but has now challenged the decision in court.
Her court application, filed at the High Court of Zimbabwe in Harare on August 26, argues that the process leading to her dethronement was procedurally flawed and violated fundamental principles of natural justice.
According to Mushandu, she was crowned Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026 on June 6 and was subsequently called to what she understood to be an ordinary meeting. She says she later discovered that the meeting was, in fact, a disciplinary hearing concerning allegations that she had left the stage prematurely after her coronation and subsequently became unavailable.
Mushandu said she had informed the organisation that she would temporarily be unavailable because she was travelling to Victoria Falls on business and had authorised the organisation to communicate with her manager during the period when she might have limited access to communications.
She said that, upon her return, her manager informed her that Tendai Bongani Hunda had raised concerns about her and that a meeting had been scheduled for July 3.
Mushandu said her lawyers subsequently wrote to the organisation after neither her manager nor legal representatives had been informed of the nature or purpose of the meeting.
She said her lawyers had made it clear that if disciplinary proceedings were being contemplated, she expected to be given adequate notice of the allegations, sufficient time to prepare and an opportunity to be legally represented.
According to Mushandu, Patience Lusengo assured her that the meeting was not a disciplinary hearing.
"Patience Lusengo assured me that the meeting was not intended to constitute a disciplinary hearing. Trusting in that assurance, I attended the meeting in good faith," Mushandu said in her court papers.
She alleges that the assurance was misleading and that the meeting subsequently became a disciplinary proceeding without her being properly informed.
"The assurance proved illusory. What had been presented as an ordinary meeting was, in truth, a disciplinary enquiry concealed beneath the guise of a meeting," she said.
Mushandu argues that she was never formally informed that disciplinary proceedings had commenced or that she faced the possibility of losing her title.
She also denies the allegations against her and says she was not given a proper opportunity to respond to them.
"Those allegations are wholly denied. More importantly, I was never afforded a proper opportunity to address them on their merits," she said.
She said she only discovered that the meeting had been treated as a disciplinary hearing when she received the written determination revoking her title.
"It was only upon receipt of the determination that the true nature of the meeting was revealed," she said.
"Thus, the first notice I received that I had stood trial was the letter informing me that judgement had already been given against me."
Mushandu argues that the process breached the audi alteram partem principle, which requires a person affected by an adverse decision to be given a fair opportunity to be heard.
She also told the court that the loss of the title could not be assessed solely in financial terms because of the impact it could have on her professional reputation and modelling career.
Mushandu has a long history in modelling and pageantry. She told the court that she became the youngest person to be crowned Miss Zimbabwe in 2011 and subsequently represented Zimbabwe at international competitions, including Miss World 2011, where she reached the top 10, and Top Model of the World 2012, where she was first runner-up.
She also cited her victory at World Supermodel International among her previous achievements.
"My crowning as Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026 was therefore not merely the acquisition of a title, but the continuation of a long-standing career and reputation built upon pageantry, modelling and public representation," she said.
She argued that the title carried prestige, publicity, professional standing, branding opportunities and the opportunity to represent Zimbabwe internationally.
"These intangible benefits are central to the value of the title and, by their very nature, cannot only be adequately quantified in monetary terms," she said.
Following the decision to revoke her title, Mushandu's lawyers wrote to the respondents on July 28, challenging what they described as procedural irregularities and demanding that she be reinstated.
She said the respondents had not substantively responded to the concerns raised in the letter or taken steps to reverse the decision.
"Their silence has left standing, a determination reached through a process lacking in fairness and contrary to the principles of justice," Mushandu said.
She has now asked the High Court to intervene and set aside the decision revoking her title.
The respondents listed in the court application include the Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe organisation, Tendai Bongani Hunda, Joshua Taderera, Simbarashe Chinyemba, Denny Marandure, Patience Lusengo, Apphia Musavengana, Zodwa Mnkandla, Danya Kabwebwe, Tafadzwa Zimoyo, Kevin Zhou, Jane Mutamangira and Gracious Matara.
If successful, Mushandu's application could result in the dethronement decision being set aside and potentially pave the way for her reinstatement as Miss Cosmo Zimbabwe 2026.
The matter now shifts the bitter pageant dispute from public debate to formal judicial scrutiny, where the circumstances surrounding Mushandu's dethronement and the fairness of the disciplinary process will be tested before the High Court.
Source - The Chronicle
Join the discussion
Loading comments…
