By Simba Chikanza | An Insider’s View | The recent USD100,000 (Mahere v Kudzayi) court win over defamation by Fadzayi Mahere, the first of its kind in history suggests she is a victim who was truly wronged, at a time when the country’s only 5 High Court cases regarding Twitter based defamation are all about her and her alone. It seems as if the courts were created for only one person, who ironically is the daughter of the most notorious permanent secretary in history, who was fired by his own party leader over violence and abuse in an Education Ministry assignment, Stephen Mahere.

The public deserve to know how and why Mahere is using the courts to delete from the public domain records of her conduct and that of her father’s human rights abuses. Once records are perused, people will understand the facts surrounding how she is magically winning defamation cases.

The plucking-of-docs-scam Fadzayi Mahere has done on Mr Edmund’s Kudzayi using the courts, to abusively fast-track a USD100,000 defamation win, is similar to what she did on my own documents in the previous High Court court case(Petina Gappah).

I am an insider over her conduct and have to alert the public she is a worse scammer than the GoldMafia people I spent 7 years investigating. Lawyers all over are discussing how her celebrations over this abuse of courts are so shameful. I have alerted the Law Society @lawsocietyofzim over her conduct, and one day this young woman who’s doubtlessly corrupt, will be stopped. All her other financial scams raking public money such as NSSA will be known. In my previous spaces I highlighted evidence showing that she is just a social media magician, nothing more; a character abusing the courts in order to paint self clean, even when it is so obvious there is no need to. I urge the public to read and not be turned into zombies clapping for a petulant ZANU PF child.

The following is a statement by Mr Edmund Kudzayi titled: Statement on the US$100 000 Default Judgement

The default order in Mahere v Kudzayi rests not on merit but on a single demonstrable falsehood.

In her condonation application Advocate Fadzayi Mahere swore, under oath, that when the matter was struck off for inactivity she had already applied for a pre-trial conference and was merely “awaiting a date”, insisting the case was “ripe for set-down”.

The High Court record shows no such application. The Rule 49 documents that must accompany a pre-trial-conference request are absent; that silence is conclusive evidence of fabrication. Mahere’s misrepresentation revived litigation the Court had twice struck off, leaving the ensuing default judgement a procedural shell built on perjury.

When I speak of criminal judges in the High Court, the conduct of Justice Wamambo illustrates the corruption I condemn. You must condemn it too. On 5 March I sent him a letter by DHL, which his office signed for. In that letter, now released for public inspection, I warned that the proceedings were grounded in fraud and that no lawful basis existed for him to let the matter continue unless he was complicit.

After acknowledging receipt he remained silent. Staff later told me he claimed not to have read the letter. What sort of judge signs for a document and then professes ignorance of its contents? A shameless judge without honour.

For clarity, the letter stated:
• No application for a pre-trial conference was ever filed.
• The applicant’s sworn claim to the contrary constitutes perjury, nullifying the condonation and every step that followed.

This feigned ignorance was not Justice Wamambo’s first illicit act in aid of Mahere. Earlier he let her bypass the mandatory round-table meeting at which litigants agree the issues for trial. Had that meeting occurred, her perjury would have entered the record. To shield his favourite he permitted her to cheat, dispensing with the meeting without justification.

These are criminal acts.

That episode is past. We now enter the real legal contest in Zimbabwe’s High Court, where the maxim fraus omnia vitiat: fraud vitiates everything admits no exception; a judgement raised on deceit cannot stand.
Accordingly, I shall lodge an urgent application for rescission.

Celebrations are premature. Advocate Mahere is a criminal practitioner who ought to be struck off. The substantive battle has yet to begin, and when it does the record will show that the only issue is her fabrication, not my liability.