ZIMBABWE: Trial of a High Court judge puts judiciary in spotlight

[ This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations]

JOHANNESBURG, 23 Aug 2005 (IRIN) - As the trial of a High Court judge arrested for allegedly obstructing the course of justice gets underway in Zimbabwe, law experts say the proceedings are likely to bring the independence of the judiciary under close scrutiny once more.

Judge Benjamin Paradza is facing charges brought against him by state prosecutors in 2003 of attempting to defeat the course of justice by telephoning fellow judges and asking them to release the passport of a business partner accused of murder. Paradza has denied the allegations, and last year stalled the proceedings of the inquiry by lodging a constitutional case in the Supreme Court.

Paradza's arrest was roundly condemned by human rights groups, who accused the government of cracking down on independent-minded judges and packing the courts with sympathetic ones. The rights groups maintain the charges are political and linked to a series of perceived 'anti-government' rulings made by the judge.

A month before his arrest, Paradza ordered police to release Mayor Elias Mudzuri, head of the opposition-controlled Harare municipal council at the time; the judge also struck down eviction notices against white farmers, although he is a veteran of Zimbabwe's war of independence.

Police have insisted that the case is purely criminal.

Irene Petras of Zimbabwe's Lawyers for Human Rights told IRIN: "This trial will, once again, give the courts an opportunity to show just how able they are to deliver justice fairly. So far, it has been evident that judges are expected to toe the party line; failure to do so often results in unfair treatment."

Relations between the government and the judiciary have been less than cordial ever since judges ordered police to remove militants occupying white-owned farms in the runup to the 2000 parliamentary elections.

Several judges - including former Chief Justice Anthony Gubbay - have been forced to resign or retire early.

"The problem right now is that lawyers and the Zimbabwean public seem to have lost confidence in the justice system, chiefly because the courts are seen to be partial to the government. There are also several incidents where court orders have been disobeyed, which has contributed to a culture of impunity," commented Joseph James, president of Zimbabwe's Law Society.

He added that the perception that judges had been compromised arose mainly from the benefits they had reportedly received from the government in exchange for their support.

"How can a judge be independent when he has received land from the government? James asked. "This automatically means that he is at the whim of the executive."

[ENDS]