Online Reporter
Zvikomborero Parafini
PHD leader Walter Magaya has filed a fresh application for referral to the Constitutional Court.
The State opposed the application describing it as “frivolous and vexatious,”
The State said it was designed to delay the proceedings and frustrate the start of the trial.
Magaya is accusing the prosecution of allegedly violating his rights by trying to force the start of his rape trial against evidence of withdrawal of cases by some of the suspected victims.
Represented by Admire Rubaya and Everson Chatambudza, Magaya says the trial cannot start amid evidence of unfairness and wants the Appex Court to intervene.
“I submit with respect that this process has become unconstitutional.
“The State, which is aware that a false complaint was made and which has received a withdrawal of that complaint to that end, must not throw the matter to the court.
“That is an abdication of constitutional function.
“The complainant expressly indicates her wish to withdraw and confirms that she has ad nauseum and repeatedly communicated her intention to the Prosecutor General and officers of the NPA.”
The clergyman argues that the matter is now beyond legal with the prosecution allegedly seeking selfish agendas.
“I submit that the State’s intentions are tainted. The State is in pursuit of nothing legal.
“It seeks to involve the criminal justice system in moral defilement.
“This in my submission would compromise the integrity of the criminal justice delivery system and would dishonour the administration of justice.”
Magaya further alleges that the prosecution is interfering with investigations, highlighting that the Chief Director Tendai Shonhayi told the court on January 26, this year, that she wanted to amend the statement of suspected rape victim based in Ireland.
He said he has been served with a new statement recorded on the 27 of February, 2026, but has not been served with the original statement which resulted in the State formulating an opinion that he was supposed to be arrested and placed on remand.
“A prosecution that shapes the evidence it intends to prosecute on cannot be said to be impartial, independent, fair, or lawful.”
Magaya claims DNA samples were taken against his will after the police clandestinely acquired a court order without his involvement or his lawyers.
“The manner in which the warrant was obtained ex parte, the forced extraction of my DNA, and the subsequent failure to disclose the results all point to a manifestly irregular process that is designed to prejudice me.
“I cannot prepare a proper defence when the State conceals evidence that itself deemed important enough to obtain through a court order.”
In response, the prosecution said it is the dominus litis and has the right to call any witness they want.
“The State is dominus litis and it is the prerogative of the Prosecutor General to determine which witness to call.
“Making a competent and compellable witness testify is not tantamount to harassment.
“On the day of the trial on the 26th of January 2026, the letter by Antonio Dzvetero Legal Practitioners had not yet been referred to the trial prosecutor as it was addressed to the Prosecutor General for her attention and was undergoing administrative processes.
“The Applicant’s averments are misplaced and amount to interference with the State witness.
“The Prosecutor General holds the sole constitutional mandate to withdraw charges on behalf of the state,” the State said.
The State said the warrant of search and seizure was obtained and executed by the police independently without the involvement of any official from the NPA.
The States said the DNA results are still outstanding due to technical time limits and that does not mean harassment.
