admin
Ignatius Masamba could be Zimbabwe’s most litigious citizen . . . and now the High Court has had enough In 2011, a new politician emerged.
Mr Ignatius Masamba thought he had what it took to lead Zimbabwe. To make his ambitions known, he took to newspapers and placed advertisements announcing his availability.
“Hello Zimbabweans. When you vote for President, do you vote for the name of the person or the name of the party? Do the correct thing. Be a step-ahead voter: the wise one. Look for the qualification of the candidate.
“Because doctors understand diseases. Accountants understand the economy, the facts/figures and strategy.
“I am an accountant: our standards are integrity, transparency, expertise and avoiding the unethical. I declare that I shall be an independent Presidential Candidate in the next election, other factors remaining equal,” he declared.
He was never heard of again. Until about a fortnight ago.
Recently, Mr Masamba was declared by the High Court a “vexatious litigant” who had clogged the judicial system with a litany of groundless litigation; and a decree of perpetual silence was issued against him.
Vexatious litigants are individuals who persistently take legal action against others in cases without any merit.
The decree forbids vexatious litigants from starting civil cases in courts without permission from the courts.
Mr Masamba was issued with the decree after the City of Harare had approached the court seeking the order over several issues.
The father of two had 26 cases that were filed at the High Court ranging from defamation to trespassing.
The majority of the cases that Mr Masamba filed were in relation to flat Number 4, Residell Court on 56 Selous Avenue in Harare.
The flat belongs to Mr Masamba’s sister Tendai, who is based in New Zealand.
Four estate agents faced the wrath of Mr Masamba’s litigious pen when he alleged that they mismanaged affairs at the apartment.
We looked for Mr Masamba to find out what drives him, and last week, clad in a brown suit and matching shoes, he strode into The Sunday Mail newsroom in a defiant mood.
“The courts want to silence me. I am going to the Constitutional Court so that the decree can be set aside,” he said. “I also want the court to investigate the conduct of some legal officers whom I know are incompetent and biased.”
Mr Masamba said he was going to present his case to human rights lawyers and civic groups.
The man, whom the courts have described as mentally unstable, said he spends most of his time and financial resources at the High Court. He said he was “pre-occupied” with the High Court and was also in the process of writing an autobiography.
He claims to know the reference numbers of all his cases.
According to Mr Masamba, most judges, magistrates and lawyers are invariably either corrupt or incompetent.
Living off rentals from his sister’s flat, Mr Masamba – who says he is accredited with the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants – is a bitter man.
“The judicial system haemorrhaged me. I exhausted all my money at the courts. I live off rentals from the flat but now I do not have a tenant,” Mr Masamba said.
There can be no doubting from the way he talks that Mr Masamba will not be easily kept away from the courts.
The 53-year–old has often reacted to unfavourable judgements by writing allegedly defamatory and offensive letters of complaint to whoever he felt had wronged him.
Among some of Mr Masamba’s “victims” were Judge President Justice Chiweshe, Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku, the Harare town clerk and the Secretary of the Judicial Services Commission.
A neighbour was taken to court for allegedly uprooting Mr Masamba’s vegetables.
In a weird, claim, Mr Masamba and his son, Ian Farai, sued the Zimbabawe Schools Examination Council for US$1,4 million.
After home-tutoring his son, Ian wrote “O” and “A” Level examinations in 2006 and 2008. He dismally failed both exams before re-writing the “A” level examination a year later.
Again, he failed.
The Masambas would not accept that the boy was perhaps not good enough at the time of sitting for the exams and they approached the courts for relief.
What followed was an unusual claim in which the duo claimed compensation for, among other things, “professional negligence for mental suffering”.
Being a chip off the old block, Ian also demanded compensation for “breach of contract” because he paid “exam fees for a fit and proper result”.
He further claimed that Zimsec issued “unfair and provocative discriminating results” which resulted in “damage of mental suffering directly as a result of the defendant’s carelessness”.
The older Masamba’s conclusive paragraph in the suit was the stuff out of legal fiction: “I am suing for the careless and deliberate act by the defendant of having to watch ghastly and inexplicable subtle torture my son.”
Using confusing grammar and mutilated syntax, the duo also claimed that Ian was denied examination results.
They alleged that the denial was as a result of “unprincipled political corruption” which they further said resulted in “financial sabotaging circumstances and a forced wastage of money”. Ian alleged that the denial “greatly physically inconvenienced” him. Needless to say, the two lost the case and had to pay the defendant’s legal fees.
Another case in which the judicial system was subjected to torturous verbiage is the one in which Mr Masamba filed a suit against the Zimbabwe Electricity Transmission and Distribution Company, which he sued for US$1 960.
In the claim, Mr Masamba claimed that the utility bills that were issued by the Zesa subsidiary were a “nuisance” and demanded US$150 as compensation. He also claimed US$1 500 for “professional negligence” by the company and a further US$300 for “mental distress/physical inconvenience/time”. Mr Masamba demanded US$10 as compensation for “transport/stationery and photocopying”.
The claim was dismissed with costs on the basis that it was confusing and incoherent. Dissatisfied with the magistrate’s ruling, he approached the High Court where he again lost.
In another case, Mr Masamba indicated that he had approached a legal practitioner who had agreed to handle his case.
When asked to present the legal team, Mr Masamba said he did not know the name of the legal team or law firm.
In 2013, the man took the Minister of Justice and the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission to court.
He argued that ZEC failed to publicise the nomination process and also failed to provide prospective candidates with information on nomination fees and dates.
After assessing the suit and its trademark verbosity, the High Court dismissed the application.
Suffice to say, Mr Masamba is an intriguing character.
When we visited the flat his New Zealand-based sister owns, we were greeted by a note to prospective tenants.
The note reads: “I want a current pay slip and address of current employer. Don’t chance. Phone (number removed), text messages preferred. Stick to terms of contract. If you have payment date problem with employer, do not peddle them here.”
Online sources define vexatious litigation as legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary.
Vexatious litigation may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Britian introduced the Vexatious Actions Act in 1896 as a response to the actions of Alexander Chaffers, a lawyer who filed numerous actions against leading members of Victorian society.
When costs were awarded against him, Chaffers failed to pay.
Online Reporter