No recusal for Magaya

Demands for the recusal of the chief prosecutor, Tendayi Shonhayi, in the fraud and sexual misconduct prosecution of Walter Magaya, the founder of PHD Ministries, have been categorically refused by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), which has dismissed allegations that she is “compromised” as an unfounded attempt to thwart justice.

In a strongly worded statement issued yesterday, the NPA confirmed it had received a formal request from Magaya’s legal team seeking the recusal of the state prosecutor.

The defence had alleged that the prosecutor’s conduct suggested a personal bias that would infringe upon the PHD Ministries leader’s right to a fair trial.

“The National Prosecuting Authority wishes to state clearly that the application for the recusal of the lead prosecutor in the matter involving Walter Magaya has been declined,” the NPA said. “The allegations of compromise and bias raised by the defence are found to be without merit, unsubstantiated, and appear to be a tactical manoeuvre designed to frustrate the progress of the trial.”

The NPA further emphasised that prosecutors were officers of the court bound by a strict code of ethics, adding:

“The authority remains fully confident in the integrity and professionalism of its officers. We will not be intimidated into changing personnel simply because the defense finds the state’s pursuit of justice to be rigorous.”

This legal skirmish follows months of intense courtroom drama.

Magaya is facing serious allegations involving fraud and sexual misconduct—charges he has consistently denied.

His defence team, led by Admire Rubaya, has recently intensified its efforts to challenge the state’s handling of the case, culminating in the demand for a change in the prosecutorial lineup.

The NPA’s refusal to budge on the recusal issue signals a “gloves-off” approach as the state moves toward a full trial.

As it stands, the trial is set to proceed with the current legal teams intact.

The NPA reaffirmed its mandate.

“Our focus remains on presenting the evidence before the court and ensuring that the rule of law is upheld without fear or favour,” it said.

In a letter to the NPA, Magaya’s lawyers accused Shonhayi of being biased.

“Our client instructs, and has it on good authority, that Ms Tendayi Shonhayi is a member of a rival church known as United Family International Church (UFIC) which is considered by our client as a rival church to the accused person’s church PHD Ministries as well as to the accused person himself. It is our client’s considered view that Ms Tendayi Shonhayi is on a mission of her own to try and persecute him on the basis that she wants to destroy our client’s church for the benefit of UFIC, which is a competing rival church,” read the letter.

“Our client is aware that Ms Tendayi Shonhayi is the one who unilaterally made the decision to move his trial from court 15, which is an open court, to the Victim Friendly Court, even before the presiding trial magistrate had determined if the matter was to be heard in the Victim-Friendly Court using intermediaries for the alleged victims.

“Furthermore, she is the one who once prepared the charge sheet, state outline and witness statements, which had no names of the alleged complainants in contravention of section 146 of the CPEA (Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act). She only had to serve the accused’s defence counsel with new charge sheets, which now had names after the accused’s counsel had taken her to task. She further had to write the witness names on the typed witness statements using a blue pen. For your convenience, we have attached the defective documents that the accused person was once served with.

“Our client has also observed that the proceedings seem to be marred by the overbearing preponderance of Ms Shonhayi, who is not the lead counsel. Instead of leaving Mr Clemence Chimbari (lead counsel) to argue, she is always seen whispering something to him, showing that she is the one in charge.

“Our client is aware that Ms Shonhayi has requested the bail record with indications that she intends to appeal against the granting of bail by the High Court of Zimbabwe. She had previously raised flimsy reasons for the recusal of Justice Mandaza, who was originally seized with the bail matter.

“When she proceeded to the case management meeting with Justice Mandaza she was already armed with an application for recusal of the judge in circumstances where she had already placed her oral submissions before the judge.

“It is the client’s contention that Ms Shonhayi is not impartial in this matter as required by the law for a prosecutor. She clearly has a personal agenda emanating from her personal hatred against both the accused person and his church. It is, therefore, not in the interests of justice that she is allowed to continue being part of the prosecuting team, given this background.

“Thus, it is our client’s considered view that Ms Shonhayi is conflicted and should be recused from the matter. Our client is of the firm view that Ms Shonhayi is using emotions, and is doing the bidding for her own “PAPA” in circumstances where she should be detached from the case. If there is a need for you to beef up the State team, may you kindly consider any other prosecutor who does not have vested interests in the matter, like Ms Tendayi Shonhayi,” Magaya added in his letter.