daniel chigunwe
Nyore Madzianike Senior Court Reporter
THE State expected this month to decide on the course to take in the case involving former Cabinet minister Prisca Mupfumira and ex-Public Service Commission permanent secretary Ngoni Masoka’s criminal offences, after the magistrate who was handling the case was elevated to the High Court.
Mupfumira and Masoka are charged with criminal abuse of office and concealing a transaction from a principal.
The matter was being handled by former chief magistrate Mr Munamato Mutevedzi, who is now a High Court judge.
The State yesterday requested that the matter be set for April 22 for it to decide on the way forward, after Mupfumira and Masoka appeared before regional magistrate Mr Stanford Mambanje.
The State also indicated that it was waiting for the High Court’s determination on Mupfumira’s application for review of former chief magistrate Mr Munamato Mutevedzi’s ruling dismissing her application for separation of their trials.
Mupfumira approached the upper court seeking nullification of justice Mutevedzi’s decision arguing that it was based on evidence and facts that were not placed before the court.
Through lawyer Mr Admire Rubaya, Mupfumira applied for a separate trial from Masoka, whom she said will be her star witness during trial.
Mupfumira claims that Masoka was the accounting officer during their tenure of office and was the best person to articulate transactions that led to her arrest on criminal abuse of office charges, and concealing a transaction from a principal.
Justice Mutevedzi dismissed her application saying there were witnesses who had testified and linked her to the offence during the on-going trial.
In dismissing Mupfumira’s application, the court said State witnesses, Ray Ndhlukula and James Matiza, had already given evidence that linked her to the offence, but the two are yet to testify.
Mupfumira argued that the irregularity made by Justice Mutevedzi could only be cured by the High Court on review.
In the application, Mupfumira cited Justice Mutevedzi and Masoka as respondents.
It was argued that the record of proceedings in the regional Magistrates Court would show that Ndhlukula and Matiza had not yet testified and so that the statement that the two had testified and mentioned both co-accused in their testimonies, is therefore not true.
Online Reporter