Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chief Court Reporter
THE Gospel of God Church faces a pivotal legal battle to safeguard its foundational spiritual identity, resisting efforts to exhume the remains of its founder, Peter Jack Masedza — revered as Johane Masowe weChishanu.
His grave, located at the Gandanzara shrine outside Rusape, stands as the church’s spiritual epicentre, embodying its authority and heritage.
Masedza’s sons, Magaga and Reuben, have challenged this sanctity, seeking to exhume their father’s remains from the shrine.
The High Court granted them a declaratory order recognising their right to do so, despite the church’s opposition. This decision was brought before a three-judge panel of the Supreme Court —Justices Susan Mavangira, George Chiweshe and Joseph Musakwa —who heard submissions from both parties and reserved judgment.
The church is seeking to overturn the High Court ruling, arguing that a dead body is not property capable of ownership and therefore cannot be the subject of declaratory relief.
The church’s counsel submitted that no legal right exists in a cadaver, asserting that neither Magaga nor Reuben holds any legal interest or entitlement to their father’s remains.
Their claim, the church argued, is based solely on moral and cultural considerations, which do not constitute legal rights or grounds for declaratory relief.
The church criticised the High Court’s decision, stating that it granted relief without the establishment of any legal right or entitlement.
The church also argued that the declaratory order contradicted the pleadings, particularly regarding the issue of prescription.
It noted that burial arrangements were made with the late leader’s consent, and the town council issued the burial order decades ago.
The church questioned the rationale for reversing these arrangements after 50 years, emphasising the principles of finality and respect for the deceased.
In response, Magaga and Reuben Masedza urged the court to dismiss the appeal, arguing that the church’s objections lack merit.
They maintained that the High Court’s decision was not predicated on ownership of the remains but on their right to exhume their father’s body. The brothers argued that the Church failed to challenge the High Court’s recognition of their interest in the matter, which they asserted was grounded in legal and cultural significance.
The Masedzas refuted the church’s claim that granting them the right to exhume their father’s remains equated to ownership of the body.
They emphasised that the matter concerned a declaration of rights, not property ownership, and that the church’s objections regarding private property were immaterial to the declaratory relief granted.
The brothers argued that the High Court adhered to established legal principles, including the acknowledgment that a cadaver is not property.
They contended that the church’s appeal conflated the declaratory relief with the consequential relief that would allow access to the shrine, which was not appealed.
The church was represented by Advocates Sylvester Hashiti and Edley Mubaiwa, instructed by Venturas and Samkange. Advocates Lewis Uriri and Choice Damiso appeared for the Masedza family. Judgment has been reserved.
