Harare, Zimbabwe – – The rape case against Walter Magaya, founder of the Prophetic Healing and Deliverance (PHD) Ministries, has been thrown into further turmoil with allegations of coercion, interference, and a complainant’s apparent intention to withdraw charges.
Lawyers representing one of the alleged victims have formally notified the Prosecutor General of their client’s desire to discontinue the case against Magaya, who is currently on bail. According to a letter from the legal team, the client has signed an affidavit withdrawing the complaint. The lawyers stated they are awaiting a response from the state regarding the withdrawal.
However, this development is shadowed by serious accusations of intimidation and undue influence. A separate legal team representing another complainant alleges they received an anonymous phone call from an individual claiming to be from the Police Anti-Corruption Unit. The caller reportedly demanded to know who had instructed them to represent the complainant, a request the lawyers deemed “improper and unprofessional.” No identifying information or official credentials were provided during the call.
“It is improper for officers to make inquiries of this nature through unidentified telephone numbers without disclosing their full names and official capacity,” the lawyers stated, emphasizing the need for transparency and adherence to proper channels in any legitimate communication.
The allegations extend beyond improper inquiries. The legal team further claims their client is being held at an undisclosed location and subjected to alleged coercion and threats aimed at preventing her from withdrawing the charges, despite having already signed the affidavit. They also revealed that the alleged victim did not initially report the alleged offence herself, but was contacted by authorities after a report was filed on her behalf.
“It is not in the interest of justice to force or threaten our client simply because she is not interested in pursuing a matter that was reported by third parties or external forces,” the lawyers argued, raising concerns about the integrity of the investigation.
Access to the client has also become a point of contention. The legal team reports being denied access to their client, despite her not being the accused, and have formally requested immediate and unrestricted access to provide legal counsel, attend to her welfare, and deliver personal belongings. They argue that denying access is unlawful, even acknowledging the State’s authority in the proceedings.
“While we acknowledge that the State is dominus litis, there is no lawful basis for denying our client as her legal counsel, access to consult with us,” the lawyers stated.
The case against Magaya has been marked by a series of legal challenges. He is currently facing , arrest brought four new rape charges, escalating his existing legal troubles. He previously faced 78 fraud counts and five rape charges, with allegations that he fathered a child with one of the complainants. The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) revealed that Magaya is accused of raping two complainants on five separate occasions between and .
The unfolding events are likely to fuel further public debate surrounding Magaya, a controversial figure in Zimbabwe. Zim Now reported in that Magaya has been embroiled in legal, financial, and public controversies for over a decade. His arrest on rape and fraud allegations has sparked significant public discussion, with many scrutinizing his past actions and the influence of his PHD Ministries.
The allegations of interference in the legal process raise broader concerns about the independence of Zimbabwe’s judicial system and the potential for political or external pressures to influence investigations and prosecutions. The claims of intimidation against both the complainant and her legal representatives, if substantiated, could further erode public trust in the authorities.
The case is being closely watched not only within Zimbabwe, where Magaya commands a significant following, but also internationally, given the gravity of the allegations and the potential implications for religious freedom and the rule of law. The withdrawal of charges by one complainant, coupled with the accusations of interference, adds a complex layer to an already sensitive and highly publicized case. The Prosecutor General’s response to the withdrawal request and the investigation into the allegations of intimidation will be critical in determining the future course of the proceedings.
The situation remains fluid, and further developments are expected as the investigation continues and the legal teams navigate the challenges presented by the allegations of coercion and interference.
