Mhandu Enjoys Freedom As ZIFA Coach In Prosecuted Over Similar Offense: Analysis
18 October 2023
Spread the love

Contrasting Cases – A Football Coach and a ZANU PF Manager.

By Farai D Hove | In the current legal landscape, two cases have emerged that spotlight a stark contrast in the treatment of individuals accused of wrongdoing, raising questions of potential favoritism within the judicial system. The cases in question involve the prosecution of football coach Shadreck Mlauzi and ZBC Broadcasting manager Robson Mhandu.

**Shadreck Mlauzi’s Indecent Assault Charges**

Shadreck Mlauzi, the Mighty Warriors head coach, faces serious allegations of indecent assault. He is accused of molesting a female member of the technical team while the team was in camp at Pandhari Lodge in Glen Lorne in preparation for the Cosafa Women Championships. Mlauzi faces two counts, with accusations of inappropriate advances towards the complainant on separate occasions.

The first count relates to an incident in which Mlauzi allegedly attempted to kiss the complainant without her consent, which she refused. The second count alleges that he instructed the complainant to report to his hotel room and massage him, an action she also rejected.

Mlauzi’s legal defense argued that the court does not have jurisdiction to place him on remand for the second charge, which occurred in South Africa. The ruling on this matter is pending, and a bail application is expected to follow.

**Robson Mhandu’s Coercion Scandal**

On the other hand, the case of Robson Mhandu, a ZANU PF strongman and ZBC Broadcasting manager, is marked by an audio recording in which he is heard coercing a subordinate at work to engage in a sexual act inside the offices. The audio recording presents compelling evidence of his misconduct.

The glaring contrast in these cases lies in the response and handling of the allegations. While Mlauzi has been remanded in custody and is facing legal proceedings, Robson Mhandu’s case does not appear to have progressed with the same urgency.

The difference in treatment between these two cases raises concerns about possible preferential treatment or a lack of equitable justice within the legal system. It is essential for the justice system to maintain consistency and ensure that all individuals accused of wrongdoing are treated fairly and impartially.

As the legal processes in these cases unfold, they serve as a reflection of the justice system’s integrity and its commitment to upholding the principles of justice and fairness, regardless of the individuals involved. Public scrutiny of these cases will likely persist, and the outcomes will be closely observed to determine whether justice prevails without bias.