A Harare magistrate Catherine Chimanda nearly engaged in a shouting match with lawyer Beatrice Mtetwa who was representing another human rights lawyer Alec Muchadehama according to the United States embassy.
The embassy said although Chimanda had ruled in favour of Muchadehama by removing him from remand, she had difficult in concealing her hostility towards the two human rights lawyers.
Muchadehama was facing charges of obstructing justice.
The embassy said Chimanda was compromised because she presided over highly political and sensitive cases.
Full cable:
Viewing cable 09HARARE461, AG’S OFFICE STILL PURSUING LAWYER, JOURNALISTS, WOZA
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Reference ID |
Created |
Classification |
Origin |
VZCZCXRO8488
RR RUEHBZ RUEHDU RUEHJO RUEHMR RUEHRN
DE RUEHSB #0461/01 1531510
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 021510Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY HARARE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 4561
RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AF DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY COLLECTIVE
RUEHUJA/AMEMBASSY ABUJA 2295
RUEHAR/AMEMBASSY ACCRA 2861
RUEHDS/AMEMBASSY ADDIS ABABA 2980
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 1419
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 2243
RUEHDK/AMEMBASSY DAKAR 2610
RUEHKM/AMEMBASSY KAMPALA 3028
RUEHNR/AMEMBASSY NAIROBI 5469
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 2152
RUZEHAA/CDR USEUCOM INTEL VAIHINGEN GE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUEHC/DEPT OF LABOR WASHDC
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUZEJAA/JAC MOLESWORTH RAF MOLESWORTH UK
RHMFISS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RHEHAAA/NSC WASHDC
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HARARE 000461
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
AF/S FOR B. WALCH
DRL FOR N. WILETT
ADDIS ABABA FOR USAU
ADDIS ABABA FOR ACSS
NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR M. GAVIN
STATE PASS TO USAID FOR L.DOBBINS AND E.LOKEN
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM ASEC KDEM PGOV PREL ZI
SUBJECT: AG’S OFFICE STILL PURSUING LAWYER, JOURNALISTS, WOZA
REF: HARARE 332
——-
SUMMARY
——-
¶1. (SBU) The harassment of human rights lawyers and independent
journalists continues as the Attorney General’s (AG) office–headed
by ZANU-PF stalwart Johannes Tomana–shows no signs of letting up on
politically motivated criminal prosecutions. Human rights lawyer
Alec Muchadehama and Zimbabwe Independent journalists Vincent Kahiya
and Constantine Chimakure were back in court again on May 28 on
trumped up charges. In addition, a group of eight women and two
lawyers were acquitted of charges of disturbing the peace during a
February Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) march in a trial that
demonstrated the ineptitude of both the prosecutor’s office and the
police. On June 1, the magistrate removed Muchadehama’s case from
remand, stating that there is no evidence against him. Nonetheless,
the State may still pursue the case. END SUMMARY.
—————————–
Arrest of Human Rights Lawyer
—————————–
¶2. (SBU) Popular human rights lawyer Alec Muchadehama was arrested
on May 13 for allegedly conniving with a judge’s clerk to facilitate
the release on bail of three men accused of bombing police stations
(ref A). On April 9, after months of legal maneuvering, High Court
Judge Charles Hungwe granted bail. As has become customary, the
Attorney General’s office indicated it wished to appeal, starting
the seven day clock to file the appeal while the three prisoners
remained in custody. When the AG failed to file the appeal to the
Supreme Court within the requisite period, the prisoners were
released on bail as directed by Judge Hungwe. On April 17
Muchadehama processed the necessary papers together with a court
clerk, who was also arrested for obstruction of justice, and the
three prisoners were released on bail. In a highly unprecedented
move, Attorney General Tomana ordered Muchadehama’s arrest. The
AG’s office argues that the seven day window excludes holidays and
weekends, a contention that is now before the Supreme Court.
——————————————— –
Magistrate Rules in Muchadehama’s Favor
——————————————— –
¶3. (SBU) At the May 28 hearing, Muchadehama’s lawyer, respected
human rights defender Beatrice Mtetwa, argued that there were no
facts showing that an offense was committed and Muchadehama should
be removed from remand. At most there was a difference of opinion
on how to compute the seven day period within which the Attorney
General’s appeal had to be filed in the Supreme Court. Furthermore,
on April 17 Muchadehama had advised the AG of his intention to
procure his clients’ release on bail, dmonstrating that he was open
in his actions and did not obstruct justice. The State, which
Qin his actions and did not obstruct justice. The State, which
argued to keep Muchadehama on remand for a June 17 trial, came to
court with a whopping six lawyers. On June 1 Magistrate Catherine
Chimanda ruled in Muchadehama’s favor and removed the case from
remand on the basis that there is no evidence that he intended to
obstruct justice. The State still has the right to pursue the case
by summoning Muchadehama to court. The magistrate’s ruling,
however, lends credence to Muchadehama’s argument that his arrest
and the charges were purely political.
——————————————— –
Independent Journalists to Stand Trial in June
HARARE 00000461 002 OF 003
——————————————— –
¶4. (SBU) In a related matter, Chimanda remanded journalists Vincent
Kahiya (Editor) and Constantine Chimakure (News Editor) of the
Zimbabwe Independent to June 16 for trial. The two were arrested on
May 11 for publishing the names of police officers and others
involved in the abductions of human rights defender Jestina Mukoko
and others in 2008. They are charged with “publishing falsehoods
likely to cause disaffection in the security forces.” The
information was obtained from public court documents filed by the
Attorney General in the High Court. (NOTE: We have copies of the
indictments, and the news article accurately reflects their
contents. END NOTE.)
——————————————–
Magistrate Chimanda’s Impartiality In Doubt
——————————————–
¶5. (SBU) Although Chimanda ruled in Muchadehama’s favor, several
lawyers have told us they believe Chimanda is compromised as she
presides over these highly political and sensitive cases. In
Muchadehama’s hearing, she nearly engaged in a shouting match with
Beatrice Mtetwa and had difficulty concealing her hostility for the
two human rights defenders. Chimanda also recently ruled to
withdraw the bail conditions for the abductees on May 13.
————————————-
Acquittals for WOZA Women and Lawyers
————————————-
¶6. (SBU) Also on May 28, eight women and two lawyers with Zimbabwe
Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) were acquitted of disturbing the
peace during a WOZA march on February 10. The two relatively junior
and inexperienced prosecutors called on four police officers as
their witnesses. Although some of the officers have over 20 years
of police service, they were extremely unprepared and fumbled
through their testimony. Their inability to accurately state the
laws that govern public meetings, notification, and how police
should disperse such gatherings reflected poorly on both the
officers and the prosecution’s efforts to prepare them to provide
testimony. Near the end of the trial, the magistrate himself
smirked at the police officer’s feeble testimony.
——————————————–
COMMENT: Small Cases Add Up to Big Problem
——————————————–
¶7. (SBU) It will be difficult to restore respect for human rights in
Zimbabwe’s justice system without the appointment of an impartial
Attorney General. President Mugabe’s continued refusal to revisit
Tomana’s appointment is consistent with ZANU-PF’s ongoing badgering
of its opponents through politically motivated arrests and
prosecutions. As we watched the WOZA trial stumble along, it
appeared that the State did not even intend to win, but rather
Qappeared that the State did not even intend to win, but rather
sought to use the trial as an opportunity to further harass WOZA and
Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights. The arrest of Muchadehama and
the journalists continues this pattern of using the courts to curb
political freedom and instill fear among those who would speak out,
particularly in cases associated with the abductees. While the MDC
continues to imply publicly that these court cases are not “big
issues,” we disagree. As long as ZANU-PF pursues politically
motivated arrests and controls the courts–including the
magistrates–, it will continue to maintain control of the
institutions that can restore individual freedoms to Zimbabwe. END
HARARE 00000461 003 OF 003
COMMENT.
MCGEE
(70 VIEWS)