Family still wants Mujuru body exhumed

By Takunda Maodza

HARARE- The Mujuru family is not happy with the findings of the inquest into the death of Retired General Solomon Mujuru and will seek permission to have his remains exhumed for a fresh post-mortem, the family lawyer said yesterday.

The lawyer, Thakor Kewada, said the family suspected foul play despite magistrate Mr Walter Chikwanha’s finding to the contrary. Kewada said they will write to Home Affairs Co-Ministers Kembo Mohadi and Theresa Makone seeking permission to exhume the remains from the National Heroes Acre.

The family wants a second post-mortem done by a South African pathologist. Gen Mujuru died in a fire in his farmhouse at Ruzambo Farm in Beatrice in August last year. Vice-President Joice Mujuru received a copy of the inquest’s findings from Attorney-General Mr Johannes Tomana on March 16, the day she left for India. The VP is now in Dubai. She gave the copy to Mr Kewada.

The inquest ruled out foul play in the death of one of Zimbabwe’s most decorated soldiers. Tomana agrees with the magistrate’s findings and has since recommended that police treat Gen Mujuru’s death as a “closed and completed matter”. Legal experts, however, said the family can only approach the police if it had new evidence.

Prominent Harare lawyer Terrence Hussein said: “The Inquest Act does not specify such a right (to appeal or review the process). One must understand what an inquest is all about. It is an inquiry by a magistrate in a situation where there has been sudden death. The inquiry is for the purpose of determining how a person died.

“After the inquest, it is up to the Attorney-General to determine how he wishes to proceed with the matter. The AG is strongly guided by the recommendations of the magistrate. They (the family) can only approach the police if they have got evidence that the General was killed.”

Another Harare lawyer, James Mtizwa, said: “My understanding is that the findings of the inquest are final. All inquests end at findings done by the coroner.” However, Kewada said the family might also seek a review of the inquest at the High Court or appeal against its findings.

He said the Mujuru family strongly suspected that Gen Mujuru was “demobilised and killed”. “There is suspicion in the minds of my clients and relatives that somebody killed the General and ferried his body and put it in the house,” he said. Kewada said he will write to the Home Affairs Ministers once VP Mujuru has returned from her trip.

“I cannot predict what the Minister of Home Affairs is going to say, but wisdom must prevail when we make our application. He must know that the general public still has suspicions. He must authorise exhumation of the body so that the public will not say somebody is trying to hide something.”

He dismissed Chikwanha’s observations that an exhumation might be of no value to the family considering the time that has elapsed since Gen Mujuru was buried. “The magistrate has erred again in his thinking. You can examine a body for up to 20 years,” Kewada said.

He argued that the Inquest Act (Section 2) says that “provided that if the body is interred in a cemetery established or controlled and administered under the Cemetery Act Chapter 5.4 such a body may only be disinterred upon the order of the minister responsible for Home Affairs”.

“This means that I must make an application to the Minister of Home Affairs in terms of the Cemetery Act,” Kewada said.

“We disagree with the magistrate. There are certain discrepancies in the magistrate’s findings like for example I asked the pathologist if he was a registered medical practitioner in Zimbabwe and he said he was not. He said he was here (Zimbabwe) as a result of a government-to-government (Zimbabwe-Cuba) arrangement in assisting Zimbabwe.”

Kewada said the Inquest Act prescribed that a magistrate must direct a registered medical practitioner to carry out a post-mortem and argued that Dr Gabriel Gonzalez is not a registered forensic pathologist.

“This guy is not a registered medical practitioner and I take it as a technical aspect. I also cross examined the pathologist for two-and-a-half hours and in my cross examination I established that the pathologist admitted on four occasions that his post-mortem report was flawed,” added Kewada.

Asked whether it was lawful to cross-examine witnesses in an inquest hearing, he said:

“Show me in this Act where it says it is not allowed to question witnesses. Section 4.2 of the Inquest Act says no person shall be allowed to address the magistrate as to the facts. Where does it say you cannot cross-examine? The magistrate said I was in court to help him extract the facts. If you do not cross-examine the witnesses what do you do? It does not make sense. The whole idea of an inquest is to find facts and we all know that examinations done by the police were botched up.”

Kewada also claimed that he was being denied a transcript of the inquest hearing. He believes that Chikwanha’s report omitted a number of things said by witnesses during the hearing. The Herald