In a revealing report published by the Journal of Democracy Governance and Human Rights, human rights lawyers Justice Alfred Mavedzenge and Musa Kika uncover a troubling trend within Zimbabwe’s judiciary system. Their findings point to a consistent bias in bail proceedings that favors individuals connected to the ruling Zanu PF party, casting doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the judiciary.

The focus of this concern extends beyond the simple act of granting bail. It involves unethical behavior by magistrates who seem to be influenced by outside parties, thus undermining the transparency of the judicial process. The report calls for immediate action from the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). It suggests setting up anonymous avenues for magistrates to report undue pressure, and proposes the digital recording of court proceedings to prevent any tampering with official records.

This bias is starkly illustrated through various case studies. For instance, while 13 Zanu PF activists accused of instigating violence at a rally were granted bail within nine days, human rights activist Makomborero Haruzivishe, facing similar charges, was only granted bail after 14 long months in custody. This pattern of selective law enforcement is consistently replicated across numerous cases.

Additional examples include the “Zanu PF 11,” linked to the murder of a supporter from the opposing CCC party, who received bail after 46 days. In a striking contrast, Job Sikhala, a former legislator, remained in pre-trial detention for a staggering 595 days on charges of inciting violence. Opposition figures like Joanna Mamombe and Pride Mkono faced significant delays in securing bail, while Zanu PF-affiliated individuals embroiled in corruption cases, such as Henrietta Rushwaya and Priscilla Mupfumira, encountered far less resistance in the bail process.

These examples highlight a troubling judicial leniency towards members connected to the ruling party, even when facing serious allegations, contrasted by a severe approach towards opposition members and activists. This discrepancy not only affects the individuals involved but also tarnishes the broader perception of justice and democracy in Zimbabwe.

Civil society groups are encouraged to push for legislative changes, especially amendments to the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, to foster a more equitable and transparent judicial process. These reforms are essential to rebuild trust in Zimbabwe’s legal system, ensuring all citizens are treated equally under the law, irrespective of their political ties.

This report is a critical call to action for the Zimbabwean judiciary and government to address and correct these injustices in bail proceedings. The integrity of the legal system and the democratic principles it represents hinge on the enactment of these vital reforms. Without such efforts, the legitimacy of Zimbabwe’s commitment to justice and human rights remains seriously in question.