Online Reporter
Yeukai Karengezeka-Court Correspondent
Prophetic Healing and Deliverance Ministries founder Prophet Walter Magaya’s woes continue as he was remanded in custody yesterday on four fresh rape charges.
Magaya was formally placed on remand before presiding magistrate Mrs Letwin Rwodzi and was told to apply for bail at the High Court since he is facing third schedule offences.
The State advised that his trial will run from February 16 to 19 at the Harare Magistrates Court on a continuous roll.
Prosecutors are Mr Clemence Chimbari, Mr Tendai Shonhayi and Ms Chipo Muronda while Magaya’s lawyers are Mr Admire Rubaya and Mr Everson Chatambudza.
The State alleges that the complainant is a 24 year-old woman from Harare, who, along with her family, were congregants at Magaya’s, PHD Ministries.
In June 2020, Magaya allegedly offered her a voluntary position at the church’s call centre, prompting her to move into a hotel associated with the ministry.
On the evening of July 26, 2020, Magaya allegedly invited her to a Bible study at Villa 13, a suite within the hotel. Upon arrival, she allegedly found Magaya and a female hotel staffer watching a movie.
It is alleged that the staff member later left, locking the complainant inside with Magaya. It is further alleged that Magaya dragged her into the bedroom, forcibly removed her clothes and raped her.
The following day, she informed her stepfather and later reported the incident to the police after learning of Magaya’s recent arrest on similar charges.
In the second case, the complainant is a 22-year-old woman from Chegutu.
She alleges that in 2022, she attended a church service at PHD Ministries, where she manifested spiritually and was referred to Magaya for prayer.
Following the session, she was allegedly instructed to stay at Yadah Hotel for further spiritual guidance.
In 2023, Magaya allegedly invited her to his presidential suite, where he forcibly undressed and raped her, breaking her virginity.
Magaya reportedly threatened her with death and warned her against reporting, claiming she could not fight someone as wealthy as him.
The complainant experienced prolonged bleeding and later disclosed the incident to her mother.
The third complainant is a 32-year-old woman from Harare, who claims that in 2016, while under Magaya’s spiritual guidance, she was instructed to resign from her job and offered employment at his housing project.
During a meeting at a Borrowdale property, Magaya allegedly gave her $3 000 as an advance salary.
Later, he allegedly called her into a room where he raped her. He reportedly threatened her with death if she revealed the rape.
On the final charge, the complainant is a 21-year-old shop attendant from Chegutu.
She alleges that between 2016 and 2023, she worked in the marketing group for Magaya’s book “Proceeding in Pain” and was invited to Yadah Hotel as a reward, which she initially declined.
After eventually accepting the invitation, Magaya allegedly summoned her to his presidential suite, where he forced himself on her after two women locked her inside.
Meanwhile, before his re-arrest yesterday, Magaya and his wife Tendai, charged alongside their two companies on 78 counts of fraud, had their fraud case postponed to March 27, awaiting finalisation of investigations and an indictment to the High Court.
Magaya also appeared before Harare regional magistrate Mr Francis Mapfumo for the commencement of his rape trial.
However, the State, represented by chief director of prosecution Ms Tendai Shonhayi, requested a postponement of the trial.
Ms Shonhayi explained that the State was prepared to proceed with the trial, but faced challenges regarding the availability of key witnesses based in Ireland.
She said, “One of the complainants in this matter, as well as the first person to whom the allegations were reported, are both based in Ireland. There was a communication breakdown regarding their travel arrangements. Initially, we believed they would fund their own travel, but we only learned last week that they assumed the State would cover the costs.”
She further stated that this revelation came too late for the State to process the necessary travel arrangements, adding that the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is responsible for managing such logistics.
As a result, the State applied for a postponement.
Magaya’s lawyer, Mr Admire Rubaya, objected to the postponement, arguing that the State’s lack of organisation was prejudicing his client.
He stated, “The accused was arrested in dramatic fashion by over 40 armed police officers at his prayer mountain, detained in police custody, and later remanded in prison. Yet, 10 years after the alleged offences were committed, the State is still not ready for trial.”
Mr Rubaya accused the State of misleading the court and failing to adequately prepare for the case.
He highlighted that one of the complainants had not been interviewed in person and had not signed a statement.
“This is the highest form of disorganization. The State knew they did not have a signed statement but failed to inform the court.”
Mr Rubaya also revealed that the second complainant in the rape case had communicated through her lawyer on November 6, 2025, indicating her intention to withdraw the charges against Magaya. He submitted an affidavit from the complainant, which he claimed rendered the charges baseless.
“The complainant who alleged rape has formally stated she has nothing against the accused. Effectively, the reason why the accused is on remand has collapsed,” Mr Rubaya argued.
He urged the court to remove Magaya from remand, stating that the State was using “installment justice” to harass his client.
He accused the State of employing delay tactics and arresting Magaya on flimsy allegations to create the illusion of progress.
“The accused has been reporting twice a week to the police, and no one has informed him of fresh charges. The State just wants to harass the accused; they are not seeking justice,” Mr Rubaya said.
In response, Ms Shonhayi maintained that the State had a signed statement from one of the complainants and an amended statement that was awaiting signature.
She dismissed the defence’s claims, stating, “The case has only been in court three times. The defence did not notify us of their intention to apply for the accused’s removal from remand.”
Addressing the issue of the second complainant’s withdrawal, Ms Shonhayi explained that charges can only be withdrawn by the State, not the complainant.
“As the State, we are unaware of any formal withdrawal of charges,” she said.
Mr Rubaya emphasised that Magaya’s constitutional right to a fair trial within a reasonable timeframe had been violated.
He urged the court to either remove Magaya from remand, or set a trial date without further postponements. Our client deserves justice, not endless delays,” he said.
Magistrate Mapfumo is expected to deliver his ruling on the matter today.
