Supreme Court judge justice George Chiweshe on Tuesday poked holes into the State’s case regarding marriage of the vice president Constantino Chiwenga with his estranged wife Marry Mubaiwa.
The State alleges that Marry misrepresented to Chiweshe that she and Chiwenga were planning for the solemnization of their marriage.
Mubaiwa is now being accused of forging Chiwenga’s signatures in a bid to formalise their marriage.
Chiweshe who allegedly was the matchmaker after introducing Mubaiwa to the vice president said he referred Mubaiwa to the marriage officer who is now the High Court judge Munamato Mutevedzi for solemnization of the marriage.
Mubaiwa is represented by Beatrice Mtetwa.
Chiweshe said Mubaiwa approached him as her uncle at his office at the High Court and asked to be solemnized but he referred her to Mutevedzi.
He said he did not suspect anything that Mubaiwa was misrepresenting that she wanted to be solemnized as she was staying with Chiwenga, having three children and also paid lobola for her.
He said he could not know what the two discussed at their home that led to them wanting an upgraded marriage.
“I assumed it was a request from the couple. Don’t forget Chiwenga had paid lobola, living together and having children so I had no reason to suspect. I had no reason to suspect what Mary was asking for had not been discussed with her husband,” Chiweshe told court.
Justice Chiweshe said he never thought that Mubaiwa’s request for solemnization will lead them to the courtroom.
Mtetwa asked for a comment that the charges were saying Mubaiwa misrepresented to you (Chiweshe) that she and Chiwenga were planning for the solemnization.
While commenting Chiweshe said the state could not say she misrepresent to him because he did not know what was happening in their planning for the marriage.
Chiweshe said he could not know many things in their marriage because when she married to the general and vice president Mubaiwa she stopped communicating with him.
Chiweshe said when Mubaiwa asked for that request he directed her to Mutevedzi and he was expecting Mutevedzi to call the couples and fill the forms and it was not being done by him.
However, Chiweshe said it could not been possible to solemnize couple when one is not knowing or available.
Mubaiwa pleaded not guilty saying from the time of the payment of roora on the July 2, 2011, they had agreed that they would formally wed and as is the custom, a wedding was requested from her family upon the conclusion of the roora ceremony.
“As she was pregnant with the parties’ first child at the time of the roora, no date was agreed to as at the time of the payment of roora. She delivered the parties’ first child on the 4 November, 2011 and she fell pregnant soon thereafter and gave birth to their secondchild on the 15th November, 2012 with a third pregnancy following soon thereafter with the parties’ last child being born on the 13th February, 2014,” Mtetwa submitted on behalf of Mubaiwa.
“Owing to the successive pregnancies within a short period of time, she will say that her back was considerably weakened and she suffered from back pain, resulting in the intended wedding being shelved until her back had become better. During the same period, the complainant suffered from various illnesses which included an operation for severe sinusitis. Although they spoke about the wedding from time to time, a date was never set due to their various medical conditions, the complainant’s busy schedule and the bomb blast they were involved in.”
She said when Chiwenga was in India in 2019 where he was receiving treatment they agreed that they would have a small wedding.
Mubaiwa said they ordered wedding rings from Chiwenga’s client and she couldn’t done that without him knowing.
She said she could not coerce an adult into a marriage without his consent.
“She will contend that the prosecution is part of her continued persecution through the use of the criminal justice system all done in an endeavour to force her to abandon her rights in the pending matrimonial action before the High Court. In particular, she will deny that she did anything which can remotely. be categorised as a contravention of Section 35 of the Act,”Mtetwa submitted.
Mtetwa earlier had her application for recusal of the magistrate dismissed saying he exhibited bias in his rulings.
The matter nwas remanded to today for continuation of trial.
