Bulawayo, Zimbabwe — Police have issued a stern warning to residents following a tragic case of mob justice in Lobengula suburb that resulted in the death of a man accused of theft. Authorities have arrested two suspects, Advice Dibula (36) and Khulekelani Mhlanga (43), in connection with the incident, which occurred in the early hours of December 21, 2024.

The deceased, whose identity remains unknown, was allegedly part of a group of four men accused of assaulting and robbing Dibula of his Samsung A23 mobile phone and earphones. The incident escalated when Dibula and Mhlanga retaliated, fatally attacking the alleged thief.

Bulawayo deputy police spokesperson Assistant Inspector Nomalanga Msebele urged the public to refrain from taking the law into their own hands, emphasizing the need to report crimes to the nearest police station.

“Taking the law into one’s hands often leads to tragic outcomes. Criminal matters should be handled by the police to prevent unnecessary loss of life,” said Assistant Inspector Msebele in a statement.

Details of the Incident

According to police reports:

• The deceased and his three companions assaulted Dibula and his friends near Lobengula West suburb.

• The group forcibly took Dibula’s phone and earphones during the attack.

• Dibula and Mhlanga retaliated, resulting in severe injuries to the deceased.

• The injured man was taken to Mpilo Hospital, where he was pronounced dead upon arrival.

The suspects were arrested shortly after the incident and remain in police custody.

Legal Context and Case Law on Mob Justice

This incident highlights the dangers of mob justice, a recurring issue in many communities. The law requires due process and the presumption of innocence for all accused individuals. Below are five key legal precedents emphasizing the illegality of mob justice:

1. S v. Nyirenda (1989)

In this case, the court condemned mob justice after a group of villagers assaulted a suspected thief, leading to his death. The court ruled that “no individual or group has the right to mete out punishment outside the confines of the law.”

2. Moyo v. The State (1994)

A group attacked a man they suspected of livestock theft, resulting in severe injuries. The Supreme Court ruled that mob actions undermine the rule of law and emphasized that only the judiciary can administer justice.

3. S v. Chokuda (2001)

The court convicted individuals involved in a mob beating that led to a suspect’s death. The judge noted that mob justice not only violates the rights of the accused but also jeopardizes community safety by escalating violence.

4. S v. Banda (2008)

This case involved the killing of a suspected burglar by neighborhood watch members. The court ruled that even those intending to “protect” their community must act within the law, stating that vigilantism cannot replace lawful law enforcement.

5. Mutasa v. The State (2017)

In this case, a mob fatally attacked a suspected thief. The court stressed the need for restraint and urged communities to work with law enforcement rather than resort to extrajudicial measures, describing mob justice as a “violation of the fundamental principles of justice.”

Police Appeal to the Public

Assistant Inspector Msebele reiterated the importance of allowing law enforcement to handle criminal matters. “We urge residents to remain calm and report any apprehended suspects to the nearest police station. Mob justice only leads to unnecessary tragedies, as witnessed in this case,” she said.

The police are continuing their investigations and have urged anyone with information about the incident or the deceased’s identity to come forward.

Key Takeaway

Mob justice not only undermines the rule of law but often results in irreversible tragedies. This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of allowing due process to take its course, as communities work alongside law enforcement to address crime.– ZIANA