A HARARE Magistrate has ordered Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) Commissioner-General Godwin Matanga to pay more than RTGS$50 000 to a Mazowe man as compensation for damages to his vehicle, which was burnt to ashes in 2019 by some law enforcement agents, who were evicting illegal miners at Jumbo Mine in Mazowe, in Mashonaland Central province.
Source: Matanga pays for ZRP’s misdemeanors – The Zimbabwean
Commissioner-General Godwin Matanga
Philemon Jijita, who runs a tuckshop at Masasa Farm in Mazowe sued
Matanga and Home Affairs and Cultural Heritage Minister Kazembe
Kazembe in December 2019 for payment of damages to his property after
some ZRP members burnt down his immobile Nissan Hi-Rider vehicle in
May 2019, which was parked at the farm as it had some flat tyres.
Jijita’s vehicle caught fire when ZRP members burnt some housing
structures, cabins and some grass structures that were close to his
car.
His pleas to restrain the police officers fell on deaf ears as the law
enforcement agents ordered him to move away.
With the assistance of Tinashe Chinopfukutwa of Zimbabwe Lawyers for
Human Rights, Jijita sued Matanga and Kazembe demanding compensation
for the damage caused to his vehicle.
During trial before Magistrate Dhliwayo, Chinopfukutwa argued that
Jijita suffered severe shock and trauma at witnessing his vehicle
being wantonly burnt down by ZRP officers without reasonable
justification.
This resulted in Magistrate Dhliwayo ordering Matanga and Kazembe to
pay RTGS$56 640 as compensation for special damages to Jijita’s
property.
Through instituting such anti-impunity claims against state actors who
include police officers, who often violate human rights of other
people under the guise of acting within the realm of the law, ZLHR
does so to deter and discourage such violations.
COMMENTS
The question is: Is the court order really punitive; or even sufficient compensation for the damaged property? I wonder where one would buy a Nissan Hi-Rider vehicle for something as little as US$500, which the RTGS50k may equate to, if not even less. This seems like the usual trend, whereby the compromised Courts are hell bent on siding with rogue state actors at the expense of public who are always at receiving end. First & foremost, compensation must be undoubtedly sufficient for aggrieved party to able to easily replace their damaged property. Alternatively the offender must simply be ordered to replace the damaged property; not for judges to just scratch their compromised & lice-infested heads & shout out some conjured up figures. xaaaaa!!!