News / National
Mahere wins US$100,000 in damages against 'Baba Jukwa' by default
14 hrs ago | Views
Former opposition legislator and lawyer Advocate Fadzayi Mahere has been awarded US$100,000 in damages after the High Court ruled in her favour in a defamation lawsuit against journalist Edmund Kudzayi, who was sensationally accused of being Baba Jukwa.
The case stems from a 2022 article published by Kukurigo, an online news platform reportedly run by Kudzayi, which alleged that Mahere had an extramarital affair with businessman Tinashe Murapata, resulting in the breakdown of his marriage. The publication also cited alleged WhatsApp messages and included photos of Mahere and Murapata at public events, including a funeral.
Mahere denied the allegations, arguing they were false, defamatory, and amounted to a serious violation of her privacy and reputation. She maintained that the story served no public interest and was designed to portray her as unethical and unprofessional. In court papers, she said the reports were neither factual nor justified by her role as a public figure.
The lawsuit, filed in July 2022, went uncontested after Kudzayi failed to appear before the court. On that basis, High Court judge Justice Joel Mambara granted a default judgment in Mahere's favour.
"Whereupon, after reading documents filed of record and hearing counsel, the plaintiff's claim be and is hereby granted," ruled Justice Mambara. "The defendant (Edmund Kudzayi) shall pay the plaintiff the sum of US$100,000 or the equivalent in local currency at the prevailing exchange rate. The defendant shall also pay interest on the above amount at 5% per annum from the date of service of summons to the date of payment."
Kudzayi was further ordered to cover all legal costs.
Though the ruling is final under a default judgment, Kudzayi may still seek a rescission - an application to overturn the judgment - by proving he had valid reasons for failing to respond to the lawsuit. If that fails, he may appeal the rescission decision at a higher court.
Despite his absence at the hearing, Kudzayi had earlier submitted a strong written defence, maintaining that the story published was truthful and fell within his rights and responsibilities as a journalist. He rejected any suggestion of malice, stating that Mahere was invited to respond to the allegations and that the publication acted in the public interest.
He also insisted that the report was based on "verifiable truths" and denied any admission of guilt or acknowledgement that the claims were false. Kudzayi argued that Mahere should have met the "strictest proof" to discredit his story, but ultimately the judgment was handed down in his absence.
In her submissions, Mahere argued that Kukurigo's extensive reach - claiming a readership of 370,000 and a wide social media footprint - meant the defamatory claims were widely circulated and republished, causing significant harm to her reputation. She described the fallout as damaging to her image as a legal professional, public figure, and international speaker.
The case has reignited debate around media ethics, press freedom, and the boundaries of personal privacy for public figures in Zimbabwe.
The case stems from a 2022 article published by Kukurigo, an online news platform reportedly run by Kudzayi, which alleged that Mahere had an extramarital affair with businessman Tinashe Murapata, resulting in the breakdown of his marriage. The publication also cited alleged WhatsApp messages and included photos of Mahere and Murapata at public events, including a funeral.
Mahere denied the allegations, arguing they were false, defamatory, and amounted to a serious violation of her privacy and reputation. She maintained that the story served no public interest and was designed to portray her as unethical and unprofessional. In court papers, she said the reports were neither factual nor justified by her role as a public figure.
The lawsuit, filed in July 2022, went uncontested after Kudzayi failed to appear before the court. On that basis, High Court judge Justice Joel Mambara granted a default judgment in Mahere's favour.
"Whereupon, after reading documents filed of record and hearing counsel, the plaintiff's claim be and is hereby granted," ruled Justice Mambara. "The defendant (Edmund Kudzayi) shall pay the plaintiff the sum of US$100,000 or the equivalent in local currency at the prevailing exchange rate. The defendant shall also pay interest on the above amount at 5% per annum from the date of service of summons to the date of payment."
Though the ruling is final under a default judgment, Kudzayi may still seek a rescission - an application to overturn the judgment - by proving he had valid reasons for failing to respond to the lawsuit. If that fails, he may appeal the rescission decision at a higher court.
Despite his absence at the hearing, Kudzayi had earlier submitted a strong written defence, maintaining that the story published was truthful and fell within his rights and responsibilities as a journalist. He rejected any suggestion of malice, stating that Mahere was invited to respond to the allegations and that the publication acted in the public interest.
He also insisted that the report was based on "verifiable truths" and denied any admission of guilt or acknowledgement that the claims were false. Kudzayi argued that Mahere should have met the "strictest proof" to discredit his story, but ultimately the judgment was handed down in his absence.
In her submissions, Mahere argued that Kukurigo's extensive reach - claiming a readership of 370,000 and a wide social media footprint - meant the defamatory claims were widely circulated and republished, causing significant harm to her reputation. She described the fallout as damaging to her image as a legal professional, public figure, and international speaker.
The case has reignited debate around media ethics, press freedom, and the boundaries of personal privacy for public figures in Zimbabwe.
Source - The Herals
