Mnangagwa Pardons Judge Benjamin Paradza After 19 Years: Fallout from White Farmer Ruling Resurfaces
25 May 2025 – Harare
By Farai D Hove | ZimEye |
In the loudest confirmation that he has always been a Rhodesian operative gone rogue, President Emmerson Mnangagwa has granted a presidential pardon to former High Court Judge Benjamin Paradza, nearly two decades after the controversial 2006 conviction that many legal observers have long claimed was a politically charged punishment for defying the ZANU PF government.
In a move formalised through Clemency Order No. 1 of 2025, published under Government Notice 1041/2025, Justice Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi confirmed Paradza’s pardon under Section 112(1)(a) and (b) of Zimbabwe’s Constitution. The pardon clears Paradza’s record of the two counts of corruption linked to a 2003 incident in which he was accused of improperly lobbying for the release of a white business associate’s passport.
Paradza made history in Zimbabwe as the first sitting judge to be arrested and charged with corruption. However, human rights observers and legal watchdogs have long argued that his arrest and eventual conviction in January 2006 were retribution for a 2002 High Court ruling in which he declared eviction orders served on white commercial farmers to be illegal.
The former judge was detained in 2003 after reportedly asking fellow judges to amend bail conditions for a white business associate who was facing murder charges. Unknown to him, one of the judges reported the matter to police, triggering what would become a high-profile and politically divisive case.
At the time, none of his judicial peers were willing to try him, prompting the recall of Justice Simpson Mutambanengwe from Namibia to preside over the case. Although Paradza was found guilty of breaching the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, he was acquitted of the more serious charge of attempting to defeat the course of justice.
Legal experts and human rights organisations were vocal in their criticism of the arrest. There was international outcry after Paradza was pulled from his chambers and jailed, while some Zimbabwean judges publicly expressed concern over the state’s treatment of their colleague. The International Bar Association and other legal bodies suspected the case was a targeted act of intimidation against an independent-minded judge.
At the heart of the controversy was Paradza’s landmark 2002 ruling which questioned the legality of land invasions, a stance that placed him directly at odds with President Robert Mugabe’s government and its radical land redistribution program.
“This pardon may be seen as Mnangagwa’s quiet admission that Paradza was wrongfully treated,” said one senior legal analyst who requested anonymity. “It also signals the continuing politicisation of the judiciary and the lingering legacy of Zimbabwe’s land reform chaos.”
Neither Paradza nor the President has yet publicly commented on the pardon. However, critics say the move is likely intended to temper the narrative of judicial abuse ahead of Zimbabwe’s next electoral cycle, while others view it as a strategic olive branch to legal institutions long bruised by executive interference.
The case remains one of the most telling examples of how judicial independence in Zimbabwe has been systematically undermined over the years — and how even judges are not spared when they fall out of political favour.