Judge and Lawyer Face Off as Moses Mpofu’s Fraud Trial Heats Up

The High Court in Harare saw heated exchanges between High Court judge Justice Pisirayi Kwenda and top lawyer Tapson Dzvetero during the trial of jailed business partners Moses Mpofu and Mike Chimombe on Wednesday.

The trial began with Mpofu and Chimombe pleading not guilty. However, tensions quickly escalated when Dzvetero raised concerns about the court’s composition, arguing that these issues should be resolved before the trial proceeds.

Legal Standoff Over Court Composition

Justice Kwenda dismissed the timing of Dzvetero’s objection, emphasizing that any amendments to the defense outline should have been filed before the trial began, so that the State could be properly notified.

“If there are constitutional issues about the jurisdiction, they should have been included in the defense outline,” the judge stated.

Dzvetero responded by requesting to amend his client’s defense outline to include these concerns. But Justice Kwenda pointed out that all procedural matters should have been addressed before the trial commenced.

“You can’t take the court by surprise,” he said.

Disagreement Over a Changed Assessor

Dzvetero argued that the objection was prompted by the replacement of one of the court assessors, which in his view, changed the dynamics of the court. However, Justice Kwenda insisted that the trial must proceed and ordered Dzvetero to read his client’s existing defense outline.

Dzvetero refused, stating that his client would object to the outline as it currently stood because it did not address their concerns, which led to further tension.

“You should not vent your frustration on me. It is the first time I have seen an officer of the court objecting to the court’s instructions,” the judge retorted angrily.

Request for Constitutional Court Referral

Dzvetero then asked for the matter to be referred to the Constitutional Court, so it could make a determination on his client’s concerns. Justice Kwenda warned that continued disruptions could lead to “corrective measures,” firmly stating, “I’m in charge of these proceedings.”

“The defense outline is already before us, and the law requires that it be read for electronic capture. I don’t understand why you are delaying progress,” the judge added.

When Dzvetero sought permission to consult his client, Justice Kwenda denied the request. Eventually, Dzvetero was forced to read the existing defense outline.

Mpofu’s Defense: Claim of Selective Prosecution

Mpofu argued that he was being selectively prosecuted as punishment for allegedly leaking audio recordings that exposed high-level corruption—allegations he denied.

“He seeks a determination from the Constitutional Court on whether his selective prosecution is not an abuse of justice but rather a punishment by individuals who wrongly believe he is responsible for leaking texts, audios, pictures, and videos involving Wicknell Chivayo discussing bribes to government officials. This amounts to a violation of his right to equal protection under Section 56(1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe,” Dzvetero explained.

He argued that the case is not criminal but a contractual dispute that does not justify Mpofu’s continued detention.

Mpofu maintained that he never misrepresented facts to the Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Water, Fisheries, and Rural Development.

“He neither made any false representations personally nor in collaboration with anyone else. He never intended to deceive the Ministry, nor did he foresee any real risk or possibility of causing the Ministry to act on any alleged misrepresentation,” Dzvetero argued.

Further Claims of Ulterior Motives

Mpofu also wants the Constitutional Court to decide whether the High Court’s refusal to hear his appeal violates his constitutional rights. He clarified that he was not the sole decision-maker in his company.

“There are other directors, shareholders, and employees who make decisions collectively. He is not the sole person making decisions,” Dzvetero explained.

“There are external forces or individuals who are prosecuting him for ulterior motives.”

Dzvetero accused the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) of acting on social media posts without any formal complaint from the Ministry.

Chimombe Denies Involvement

Chimombe, who is also facing charges, argued that he has no direct involvement with Blackdeck (Pvt) Ltd, the company at the center of the alleged fraud.

“He was not involved when the agreement was made, nor was he present when Blackdeck supplied goats to the Ministry. He never received any payments from Blackdeck, which were proceeds from what was paid by the Ministry,” his lawyer Ashiel Mugiya said.

Mugiya added that Chimombe’s role was only as Chairperson of the Economic Empowerment Group (EEG), a local organization that advocates for prioritizing local companies in government contracts.

“The meeting at the Ministry took place long after the alleged offense. He attended in his capacity as Chairperson of EEG, trying to mediate between the parties,” Mugiya clarified.

Trial Continues

The trial continues on Thursday, with the State alleging that Mpofu and Chimombe misappropriated US$7 million in a failed government goat supply deal.