ZANU PF’s Sybeth Musengezi, who is challenging President Emerson Mnangagwa’s 2017 ascendancy to power has filed an application for discharge at the end of the state’s case on the grounds that the State has failed to make out a prima facie case against him.
In his application, Musengezi said that during the trial, the state provided ZANU PF cell and branch sheets with incorrect addresses appearing next to his name saying it is a mere data capture errors in ZANU PF.
“In summary, the State’s case is that the Accused committed fraud by providing false addresses to the complainant, ZANIJ PF, when he became a member. In an effort to prove its case, the State tendered ZANU PF Cell and Branch sheets with incorrect addresses appearing next to the Accused person’s name. The accused ‘s defence is, in essence, that he never provided any of the addresses in question and they are merely data capture errors in ZANU PF ‘s records.
“It is the defense’s contention that the evidence led by the State falls far short of what is required to place an accused person on their defence. If anything, the evidence led by the State actually supports the Accused person’s defence,” he said to the court.
This application comes after a trial when the state led its witnesses and the State’s first witness was Godwills Masimirembwa, whom Musengezi said he, Masimirembwa, was representing the complainant, “his evidence was largely immaterial to the case as he did not have any first hand evidence that was relevant. He did not witness the Accused person making any misrepresentation nor was he able to say to whom such representation was made. He was not present when the Cell and Branch sheets were compiled nor were they in his custody.”
Musengezi also noted that Masimirembwa, “conceded that the Accused was eligible to be a member of ZANIJ PF at the branch in question since, it was common cause that he worked in that area and that, according to the ZANU PF constitution, one can become a member in an area where one works.
“He relied entirely on the assumption that the Accused had provided the information on the ZANU PF Cell and Branch sheets, yet he conceded that the ZANU PF Cell and Branch sheets contained multiple errors with respect to other members, and that he did not allege or accuse those members of defrauding the party.” adding that he was \ unable to coherently articulate the prejudice to the complainant, especially in light of the fact that it is common cause that the Accused was eligible to be a member in the relevant branch since he worked in the area.
Other witnesses which were called by the state are Oliver Muchemwa, Panganai Gwati, a police officer who investigated the matter whom Musengezi said was unable to coherently articulate the prejudice to the complainant.
In his application, Musengezi further said that all the witnesses testimonies, means that the ZANU PF Cell and Branch sheets are not a reliable source of information at all. They were proven to be riddled with errors, “thus, no conviction can be founded upon such manifestly unreliable evidence.”
