Zimbabwe judges under pressure

By Joseph Winter
BBC News Online

Zimbabwe's judiciary illustrates the country's deep political and economic problems as well as any other sector.

Zimbabwe's legal system is overwhelmed by a huge backlog

As President Robert Mugabe has felt increasingly threatened by the opposition, he has sought to extend political control over every facet of people's lives - including the legal system - and this has not improved the way things work.

Several of Zimbabwe's most senior judges have been forced to step down because their decisions have not pleased the authorities.

Some have been replaced but not all and coupled with financial problems, this has led to a huge backlog in Zimbabwe's courts.

The government's anger at a series of judgements spilled over in 2000, when the Supreme Court effectively declared illegal Mr Mugabe's central policy - seizing white-owned land for redistribution to black farmers.

The government accused the judges, some of whom were white, of being "colonial relics".

Judges threatened

In November 2000, a group of ruling party militants stormed the Supreme Court, while police watched.

ANTI-GOVERNMENT JUDGEMENTS 1990s: Econet allowed to set up mobile phone network 2000: Land reform programme declared illegal September 2000: ZBC monopoly declared illegal January 2001: Presidential ban on election challenges declared illegal 15 July 2002: Journalist acquitted in media test case 17 July 2002: Justice minister sentenced to three months in jail May 2003: Media law declared unconstitutional

The government said it could no long guarantee Chief Justice Gubbay's security and he resigned shortly afterwards.

Other judges from the Supreme and High Courts have followed.

Many of those named to replace them have close links to Mr Mugabe's Zanu-PF party.

The new chief justice, Godfrey Chidyausiku, served as a deputy minister in one of Mr Mugabe's previous governments.

The new judges have already ruled that the government's land redistribution programme is legal - in stark contrast to a ruling by the previous Supreme Court.

In the controversial ruling, four new judges backed the government, while the one survivor from the previous court dissented.

"Serious challenges to the independence of the judiciary still remain in Zimbabwe," senior legal practitioner Sternford Moyo told BBC News Online.

Law struck down

But the government cannot be sure of favourable verdicts in every case.

Anthony Gubbay was forced to resign as chief justice

Some judges have defied the insults and intimidation.

In May 2003, Mr Chidyausiku presided over the Supreme Court which declared parts of the tough new media unconstitutional.

He struck off the sections of the law which made it a criminal offence for a journalist and a newspaper to publish a falsehood.

And opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has been acquitted on treason charges by Paddington Garwe, who is not one of the new appointees.

Delays

As a result of the resignation of Zimbabwe's judges - for both political and financial reasons - the High Court was earlier this year operating at half-strength, said Mr Moyo, a former president of the Law Society of Zimbabwe.

The legal system is experiencing huge delays.

For example, Mr Tsvangirai was charged in March 2002.

Mr Mugabe has clashed with the judiciary on several occasions

It took a year for the trial to start and another year to finish.

It has then taken eight months for the judge to hand down his verdict - but this is by no means exceptional.

"It can take more than a year for judges to hand down their decisions," Mr Moyo said.

These delays have not been a problem for the government.

The police have used the laws later declared unconstitutional to great effect against those seen as anti-government.

Twelve journalists were charged under the media laws.

And when Mr Tsvangirai was charged, two-and-a-half years ago, he had to surrender his passport to get bail.

This has prevented him from travelling abroad to lobby against Mr Mugabe's regime.