πͺπππ§ππ₯ π πππ ππβπ¦ πππ¦ππππ₯ππ ππ£π£πππππ§ππ’π‘ πππ¦π ππ¦π¦ππ, ππππ ππ’π¨π₯π§ π’π₯πππ₯π¦ πππ π§π’ ππ‘π¦πͺππ₯ ππππ₯πππ¦_
π»ππ π―πππ πͺππππ πππ πππππ ππππ πΎπππππ π΄πππππ ππππ πππππ πππ π ππππππ πππππ πππ πΊππππ πππππππππ ππππ ππππ ππππ ππ π ππππππ ππππππππππ ππππππππ ππ ππππππππ πππππππ πππππππππ πππππ ππππππ ππππ.
HARARE β The High Court has dismissed former Tourism Minister Walter Mzembiβs application for discharge at the close of the Stateβs case, ruling that the evidence presented requires him to enter his defence.
High Court Judge Justice Benjamin Chikowero delivered the ruling, finding that the State had established sufficient evidence indicating that Mzembi donated property belonging to the government to churches without following required legal procedures.
Justice Chikowero said the record clearly showed that the accused made the donations and must now explain his actions before the court.
βI consider there is evidence on the record calling for a reply by the accused,β ruled Justice Chikowero.
He noted that witnesses from the recipient churches had confirmed receiving the items, and that the property remained within those institutions.
βAs at the close of the State case, the record shows evidence that the accused indeed made donations. The churches are private entities. The property did not belong to the accused.β
The judge emphasized that the central issue was not whether donations occurred, but whether Mzembi had lawful authority to dispose of State assets.
βThe courtβs view is that the State managed to prove that the accused made the donations and should put to his defence.β
Justice Chikowero further stated that the accused was aware that formal procedures existed governing the disposal or donation of government property.
βHe donated State property. The accused was aware there were processes to be followed before donations.β
The court also observed that the defence appeared to recognize the seriousness of the Stateβs evidence.
βThe court takes the view that counsel realised that the accused wonβt be able to justify his persistence with the evidence.β
The dismissal of the discharge application means Mzembi must now present his defence. The court has effectively ruled that the prosecutionβs evidence, if left unanswered, could support a conviction.
This marks a critical stage in the long-running criminal proceedings against the former minister, as the case now transitions from the prosecution phase to the defence phase.
Mzembi is expected to either testify personally, call witnesses, or present documentary evidence in an attempt to rebut the Stateβs case.
The trial continues.
Source: ZimEye
