Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro
Chief Court Reporter
THE Supreme Court has brought closure to a decades-long legal dispute over the burial of Johanne Masowe Shoniwa Masedza, dismissing an appeal by the Gospel of God Church International and confirming that the late church founder’s sons may pursue legal processes to exhume and rebury him.
However, the court stressed that only Government authorities – not the Judiciary – can authorise an exhumation.
Johanne Masowe was buried in 1973 at a Rusape site that later became the principal shrine of the church he established.
His sons, Magaga and Reuben Masedza, have long argued that they should be allowed to rebury their father at a place they can freely access.
The church, however, insists that the site was chosen by Masowe himself and has since become sacred to thousands of congregants.
Central to the case was the question of whether a site regarded as a shrine could be treated differently under exhumation laws.
The Supreme Court held that no burial place – shrine or otherwise – is exempt from the provisions of the Cemeteries Act, and that any party seeking exhumation must follow administrative procedures provided for in law.
Delivering the judgment, Justice Susan Mavangira said the lower court had merely recognised the sons’ right to initiate that process – it did not authorise the removal of the remains.
“The applicants have a right to seek the exhumation of the remains of the deceased. Whether they succeed in that quest is not for this court to decide but for the appropriate administrative authorities,” she said.
The church argued that the matter had already been settled through a 2003 High Court ruling which denied the sons access to the burial site, but the Supreme Court found that the earlier case related only to visitation and not exhumation.
It also dismissed claims that the matter had prescribed, noting that the respondents had remained engaged in related litigation over the years.
The court further observed that the exhumation process was already under way, with notices published in the Government Gazette and a local newspaper, prompting more than 50 objections.
Although this technically rendered the appeal moot, the bench decided to issue a judgment in the public interest, given the legal questions raised.
Justice Mavangira also criticised the basis of the appeal, saying the appellant “appears to be appealing against an idea, not an order,” and found no merit in the argument that a shrine was immune from statutory processes.
The ruling means the matter now shifts entirely to the Minister responsible for administering the Cemeteries Act, who will consider objections and determine whether exhumation should be approved.
Until then, the burial site remains undisturbed.
