Magaya Lawyers Allege Prosecutors Changed Witness Statements In Rape Case
Prophetic Healing and Deliverance Ministries leader Walter Magaya is pushing for his rape case to be referred to the Constitutional Court, with his lawyers arguing that prosecutors are pursuing a trial despite what they describe as insufficient evidence and the withdrawal of one complainant.
The matter was argued before magistrate Francis Mapfumo, who is expected to deliver a ruling on May 29, 2026. Magaya’s legal team, led by Admire Rubaya and Everson Chatambudza, accused the State of acting outside the law and attempting to secure a conviction using what they called “fabricated” evidence.
The State, represented by Chief Director Clemence Chimbari and prosecutor Tendai Shonhayi, opposed the application. Prosecutors argued that the application was meant to delay trial proceedings and insisted that the Prosecutor-General has constitutional authority to decide who should be prosecuted.
Defence Says Trial Has Become “Unconstitutional”
Magaya’s lawyers argued in court that the prosecution no longer had the necessary pillars to sustain a rape trial.
They claimed one complainant had withdrawn and alleged there were no medical affidavits supporting the charges.
Addressing the court, Mr Rubaya argued that continuing with the matter would amount to abuse of the justice system.
“A complaint of rape originates from a complainant, while a charge originates from the State. Yet a charge cannot exist in a vacuum, it is founded upon the complaint,” said Mr Rubaya.
“Without the complaint, the charge collapses. While the State enjoys the prerogative to prosecute, it cannot lawfully proceed when it has lost both the complaint and its sole witness.”
The lawyers further questioned why prosecutors allegedly wanted to compel a complainant to testify after allegedly indicating she no longer wished to proceed.
“Why should the prosecution drag a withdrawing complainant kicking and screaming to the criminal court for her to testify against the accused,” the defence argued.
“This is where one would ask why the prosecution is crying more than the bereaved?”
The defence also accused prosecutors of withholding DNA test results allegedly obtained from Magaya while he was in custody.
According to court submissions, Magaya was allegedly taken from Harare Remand Prison to Parirenyatwa Hospital where DNA samples were collected.
“The applicant has not been served with the results of that DNA test, nor has he been informed of what has happened to the samples,” the lawyers argued.
They claimed failure to release the results violated Magaya’s constitutional right to prepare a defence.
State Rejects Claims Of Bias And Impropriety
The National Prosecuting Authority of Zimbabwe (NPAZ) has previously dismissed allegations that prosecutor Tendai Shonhayi was biased against Magaya because of alleged links to rival church leader Emmanuel Makandiwa.
In a statement issued on February 18, 2026, the NPAZ said Prosecutor-General Loice Matanda-Moyo reviewed complaints raised by Magaya’s legal team and found no evidence supporting claims of misconduct.
“The allegations are without substance and were made without any cogent evidence,” the NPAZ said.
The authority also stressed that prosecutors operate independently under Zimbabwean law and are not influenced by outside individuals or organisations.
According to the NPAZ, decisions are made based on evidence, the law and public interest.
Prosecutors Accused Of “Panel-Beating” Case
Magaya’s lawyers also accused prosecutors of interfering with witness statements.
The defence claimed prosecutor Tendai Shonhayi admitted in court that the State was in the process of amending a statement from a witness based in Ireland.
“These admitted revelations, made openly on record, by a senior official in the NPA smack of prosecutorial impropriety,” the lawyers argued.
“This conduct is not only unlawful, but prejudicial. It reveals bias and favour towards the complainant, while subjecting Applicant to a case that has been panel-beaten into shape through prosecutorial interference.”
The State maintains that issues raised by the defence can be tested during trial through cross-examination.
Magistrate Mapfumo is expected to rule on the Constitutional Court referral application on May 29, 2026.
The post Walter Magaya Lawyers Claim State Is ‘Crying More Than The Bereaved’ In Explosive Con Court Rape Trial Fight appeared first on iHarare News.
