OPPOSITION Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) national executive member Joana Mamombe and youth leader Cecilia Chimbiri, accused of faking abduction, believe their case has ceased to be criminal, but political with ruling Zanu PF functionaries allegedly influencing court outcomes.
The two, who were arrested in 2020 before their party rebranded from being the MDC Alliance to CCC, are applying for their case to be referred to the Constitutional Court, arguing their constitutional rights have been and are still being violated.
Represented by Alec Muchadehama and Jeremiah Bamu, the two said they are concerned that what government officials say on social and public media will come to pass in courts, hence their right to a fair hearing being violated.
“This prosecution is a way of persecution. We have asked for further particulars from the State, but nothing comes. I feel this prosecution is very political. My rights were violated by my political rivals and the State says I should bring them here. This is a political case and my political rivals have information that forms part of the police docket and it’s clear they are being given this information by the police,” Mamombe told the court.
On her part, Chimbiri also emphasised that there was outside interference in their matter referring to a tweet allegedly made by information ministry permanent secretary, Nick Mangwana.
She said Mangwana tweeted that Mamombe will “rot at a mental facility” after she raised concerns about depression and the following day, the State led by Michael Reza applied for Mamombe to be committed to a mental facility at Chikurubi Maximum Security Prison, which was confirmed by magistrate Bianca Makwande.
“… The order for Mamombe to be put in a mental facility at Chikurubi Female Prison came after … Mangwana tweeted,” she averred.
It is also their argument that their rights to privacy were violated as shown on the documentary, which revealed that the police accessed their cellphones and downloaded texts, WhatsApp messages and call logs directly from those phones.
They said their medical affidavits were also displayed on social media, which attracted several comments.
The State, on the other hand, argued that the courts are independent and are not swayed by what happens on social or public media.