Connect with us

NEWS

Suspended Levi Nyagura nails Mugabe

Published

on

Levi Nyagura

Suspended University of Zimbabwe (UZ) vice-chancellor Levi Nyagura yesterday said he was being wrongly charged for illegally awarding former First Lady Grace Mugabe a PhD, insisting that the latter’s husband, former President Robert Mugabe who was the varsity’s Chancellor approved and conferred his wife with the PhD.

Citing Section 8 of the University of Zimbabwe Act, Nyagura, through his lawyer Advocate Sylvester Hashiti, said a vice-chancellor was not responsible for the issuance of degrees.

Adv Hashiti gave the notice to subpoena the former President, his wife Grace and President Mnangagwa so that they give evidence as chief officers.
The defence argued that the PhD was still in existence, adding that the current Chancellor, President Mnangagwa had the powers to revoke it.

Nyagura yesterday appeared before magistrate Mr Lazini Ncube for trial after the Constitutional Court threw out his challenge in which he was contesting a decision by the Prosecutor-General to delegate his prosecutorial powers to Messrs Tapuwa Godzi and Michael Chakandida of the Presidential Special Anti-Corruption Unit.

However, through his lawyer, Nyagura filed an application for exception and quashing of an indictment on the basis that the proper and responsible persons have not been brought to court.

“The accused was never the chancellor and has never been one at any given time particularly at the time when the PhD in issue was conferred on Grace Mugabe.

“The chancellor is the chief officer of the university. The accused was the vice chancellor and his powers are set out in terms of Section 8 of the University of Zimbabwe Act and this section provides no powers to confer or award degrees of any sort. In terms of this section, he is an officer of the university and does not act in his personal capacity.

“At the relevant period, it was Robert Gabriel Mugabe who was the chancellor…Robert Mugabe is the answerable person and must instead face the charges. Accused is the wrong person to charge,” read part of the application.

“The charges by the State fail to consider three important facts. Firstly, the PhD in question remains extant. Its validity cannot be put in question by the criminal process and lastly the former chancellor Robert Mugabe approved and conferred the degree and transcript,” he said in his written application.

He further questioned why none of the other persons involved in the enrolment, tutelage, supervision, recommendation and conferment of the PhD have been brought to court.

“The cited sections (of the University of Zimbabwe Act) clearly denote where the power to confer degrees lies.

“If any degree is not awarded pursuant to proper conduct, the awarding and conferring authorities are the ones liable at law for the conduct. In the first instance, it would be the university, in the second, the chancellor and in the third senate or council depending on the facts of the matter.
“Nowhere does accused (Nyagura) come into it, especially in his personal capacity. The State cannot impute personal liability where the same has been deliberately excluded by law.

“The State has not led any evidence from any member of any committee or council or senate who took objection to the conferment of the degree in issue.”

Nyagura pleaded for acquittal.

“For a criminal charge to suffice, it must not only allege the commission of a crime but in terms of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, must set out the facts and evidence that give rise to the charge itself.

“The charges and facts do not disclose any criminal offence and ought to be quashed on this additional basis. The accused prays that the charge be and is hereby quashed, the exception upheld and the accused acquitted,” read the application.

The State will file its written response today while oral submissions will be conducted on April 4.The Chronicle

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HEALTH

Constitutional Court sets aside High Court ruling that would have widened Zimbabwe’s abortion grounds

The Constitutional Court has declined to confirm a High Court ruling on mental health and abortion, saying the lower court skipped a required step. It did not rule the restrictions justified.

Published

on

Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Court has set aside a High Court judgment that sought to widen access to lawful abortion, ruling that the lower court did not complete the legal analysis required before striking down a law.

In a judgment delivered on 14 October 2026, the apex court declined to confirm the High Court’s declarations that provisions of the Termination of Pregnancy Act were unconstitutional, according to reports by NewZimbabwe.com and The Herald. The High Court had found the law unconstitutional to the extent that it excluded mental health as a ground for lawful termination, and that its definition of “unlawful intercourse” did not cover conduct prohibited under the Mental Health Act.

Writing for the court, Justice Bharat Patel said the High Court had not separately applied the test in section 86(2) of the Constitution, which asks whether a limitation on rights is fair, reasonable, necessary and justifiable in an open, just and democratic society. “A finding that the impugned legislation limits a constitutional right does not, without more, render that legislation unconstitutional,” he said.

The case was brought by the Community Working Group on Health and legislator and activist Nyasha Batitsa against the Health and Justice ministers, the Attorney-General and Parliament. The applicants argued that physical and mental health cannot be separated, and warned that forcing women with severe psychiatric conditions to continue a pregnancy could expose them to suicide, postpartum psychosis and lasting psychological harm.

The government defended the law, arguing that it is already broad enough to cover health conditions that threaten a woman’s life, and cautioning against a blanket approach to mental health conditions, which vary in severity. Pro-life groups that took part as friends of the court said expanding the grounds was a matter for Parliament.

The court also rejected any suggestion that Parliament’s decisions are beyond judicial review. “The conduct and decisions of Parliament, like any other exercise of public power, are subject to constitutional review by this Court,” Justice Patel said.

Importantly, the ruling is not a finding that excluding mental health from the abortion grounds is constitutionally justified. Both outlets report that the court’s decision turned on how the High Court reached its conclusion, leaving the broader question of whether mental health should be a lawful ground unresolved in these proceedings. The Act dates back to the 1970s.

Sources: NewZimbabwe.com, The Herald.

Continue Reading

BUSINESS

Government to revoke licences of non-compliant foreign firms in reserved sectors

Cabinet says foreign-owned businesses in 17 sectors reserved for Zimbabweans face licence suspension or revocation after inspections of more than 3,000 companies.

Published

on

Foreign-owned businesses operating in sectors reserved for Zimbabweans face having their licences suspended or revoked, the government said after Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting, as it moves from awareness campaigns to enforcement.

According to both The Herald and NewZimbabwe.com, inspections covered more than 3,000 companies across all 10 provinces. Cabinet was told that most foreign operators had not regularised their status despite campaigns and formal non-compliance notices. The Ministry of Industry and Commerce, the briefing said, will suspend or revoke the operating licences of non-compliant businesses in reserved sectors.

The rules come from Statutory Instrument 215 of 2025, gazetted in December 2025, which reserves 17 sectors for Zimbabwean citizens. Thirteen are reserved exclusively for locals, including borehole drilling, clearing and customs, tobacco grading, estate agencies and artisanal mining. In four others, retail and wholesale, haulage and logistics, grain milling, and shipping and forwarding, foreign firms may take part only through exemptions or regularisation plans. Retail and brick moulding were cited as areas where foreign players still have a large presence.

Both outlets reported the same compliance figures: 693 formal applications received; 269 foreign operators applying to regularise by transferring 75 percent of equity to Zimbabwean citizens; 144 entities seeking confirmation of their local status; and 63 entities qualifying for statutory exemption by meeting investment thresholds or being recognised international brands. The reports do not explain how these categories relate to the 693 total.

The reports differ on who spoke at the briefing. NewZimbabwe names Information Minister Soda Zhemu, while The Herald names Acting Information Minister Prof Paul Mavima and credits Industry and Commerce Minister Mangaliso Ndlovu with the compliance update. Neither says how many licences have so far been withdrawn, what penalties will apply, or when enforcement begins.

Sources: The Herald (via Zimbabwe Situation); NewZimbabwe.com.

Continue Reading

BUSINESS

ZINARA clears US$206 million DBSA loan for highway rebuild

The Zimbabwe National Road Administration says it has fully repaid the 2011 Development Bank of Southern Africa loan used to rebuild the Plumtree–Bulawayo–Harare–Mutare highway.

Published

on

The Zimbabwe National Road Administration (ZINARA) says it has fully repaid a US$206 million loan from the Development Bank of Southern Africa (DBSA), closing a debt that has weighed on the roads authority for years.

Board chairperson George Manyaya announced the repayment at ZINARA’s 10th annual general meeting in Harare. According to both The Herald and NewZimbabwe.com, the final payment was made on 30 September. “We no longer owe DBSA; we finished paying,” NewZimbabwe quoted him as saying.

The loan was secured in 2011 to fund the rehabilitation and upgrading of the Plumtree–Bulawayo–Harare–Mutare highway, one of the country’s main trade corridors. The two outlets give slightly different lengths for the road, so this report does not quote a figure.

The debt had repeatedly drawn scrutiny from Parliament. NewZimbabwe reported that Manyaya said the Public Accounts Committee had questioned ZINARA several times over the unpaid loan, and that clearing it was a priority for the current board because it stood in the way of raising further funding. The Herald reported that the repayment was presented as evidence that Zimbabwe honours its sovereign obligations and should help rebuild its credibility with lenders and unlock funding for infrastructure.

ZINARA collects road-user revenue, including licence and toll fees, and channels it to the maintenance and rebuilding of roads. With the DBSA obligation settled, the agency is expected to have more room to finance road works and to approach financiers, although neither report sets out specific new funding arrangements agreed on the strength of the repayment.

For motorists and transporters, the practical test will be whether the money once used to service the debt now translates into visible repairs on the country’s busiest routes.

Sources: The Herald (via Zimbabwe Situation); NewZimbabwe.com.

Continue Reading

Trending