SA six-month suspended prison sentence, suspended for five years, during which the convicts are not allowed to express themselves politically: This was the sentence against the writer Tsitsi Dangarembga from Zimbabwe and her comrade-in-arms Julie Barnes in September 2022 because they advertised institutional reforms and their release on posters had demanded from jailed journalists. With their peaceful demonstration in the Zimbabwean capital Harare, the two women had, according to the judge in the first instance, “incited public violence”.
The verdict was the low point of a grueling and absurd show trial: sometimes the prosecutor could not be found, sometimes witnesses inadvertently admitted to the manipulation of evidence. The two-year process had little in common with constitutional principles. This was also recognized on Monday by the presiding judge in the appeal process brought by Dangarembga and Barnes before the Zimbabwe Supreme Court. After only fifteen minutes of hearing, Judge Happious Zhou overturned the previous verdict. Tsitsi Dangarembga and Julie Barnes are free.
This outcome was unexpected given recent developments in Zimbabwe. In view of the upcoming elections in August, the regime is tightening the noose around activists and journalists. In the past few weeks alone, three leading Zimbabwean opposition figures have been convicted on similar charges. The fact that the two women have now been acquitted is mainly due to the integrity and independence of the judge leading the hearing.
Not “obscene, threatening, abusive or offensive”
In the past, Zhou had repeatedly drawn attention to himself with verdicts that, while in line with the laws of the liberal constitution, displeased the regime. In 2021, for example, he ruled against an extension of the term of office of Zimbabwe’s Chief Justice – contrary to the wishes of autocratic President Emmerson Mnangagwa. Although the Chief Justice is still in office following Mnangagwa’s personal intervention, the ruling at the time showed that Zhou does not shy away from confrontation. It was a happy coincidence for Dangarembga and Barnes that their appointment was decided by him.
In addition, the public prosecutor, who seemed overwhelmed, did not manage to explain conclusively why the demonstration by the two women in July 2020 was illegal. For this, the statements made should have been “obscene, threatening, abusive or offensive”. Even the witnesses for the state prosecution stated at the time that this was not the case. However, the judge in the first instance decided differently – and thus caused astonishment for her colleague Zhou. He reversed her judgment. The outcome of a 26-month trial was overturned in minutes. It once again illustrates the shaky foundations of the original verdict, even by Zimbabwean standards.
#Zimbabwe #Supreme #Court #acquits #Tsitsi #Dangarembga