Citizen Reporter
3 minute read
19 Dec 2018
10:20 am

AfriForum says they have a warrant of arrest for Grace Mugabe

Citizen Reporter

The group's private prosecutions unit argued that the SA government unlawfully gave her immunity.

Head of AfriForum’s private prosecution unit, Advocate Gerrie Nel and Gabriella Engels who opened assault charges against Grace Mugabe in 2017 is seen in the Pretoria High Court during the proceedings, 10 May 2018, Pretoria. Picture: Jacques Nelles

Lobby group AfriForum announced on Wednesday that they have obtained an arrest warrant for former first lady of Zimbabwe Grace Mugabe.

She was initially granted immunity by the South African government.

They made the announcement at a press conference in Pretoria on Wednesday, led by AfriForum’s head of private prosecutions, Advocate Gerrie Nel, and CEO Kallie Kriel.

In May, former international relations and cooperation minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane was accused of deliberately misinterpreting international law to stop Mugabe from facing criminal prosecution in South Africa.

Legal argument was presented in the High Court in Pretoria, where the Democratic Alliance and AfriForum asked the court to set aside Mashabane’s decision to grant diplomatic immunity to Mugabe.

This followed an incident in August last year when the then first lady allegedly stormed into a Sandton hotel room and assaulted South African model Gabriella Engels – who was in the company of Mugabe’s sons – with an extension cord.

Freedom Under Law, the Commission for Gender Equality and the Woman’s Legal Centre Trust also submitted legal argument in the matter as friends of the court.

Etienne Labuschagne SC, for Engels and AfriForum, argued that Engels had laid a criminal charge against Mugabe, but could not proceed with the criminal case unless the court set aside Mugabe’s immunity.

Judge Bashir Vally wanted to know if Mugabe’s immunity had not lapsed once her husband, Robert Mugabe, was no longer in office as Zimbabwe’s president, and if this did not render the issue before court moot.

Labuschagne argued that it did not, as his client wanted the court to decide on the issue and either declare that Mugabe never had immunity in the first place, or that if she had immunity, it had lapsed and that her criminal prosecution could proceed.

Labuschagne and Anton Katz SC, for the DA, both argued that the international relations minister had misinterpreted international law and treaties, which did not grant immunity to the spouses of heads of state.

Katz argued that the retrospective decision was unreasonable, constituted an irrational abuse of statutory power, violated the rule of law and should be set aside as unconstitutional.

The minister denied granting immunity to the former first lady, but insisted that she was under an obligation in terms of international law to recognise Mugabe’s immunity.

Karrisha Pillay, for the Woman’s Legal Centre Trust, argued that the consequence of the minister’s decision created an unjustified hierarchy of who was or was not prosecuted for violent acts in South Africa, which violated the right to be free from all violent acts guaranteed by the Constitution.

Engels told reporters she hoped Mugabe came back to South Africa to account for what she did and was happy that the ball was finally rolling, but left everything in God’s hands.

It was reported in the Sunday press this weekend that she has continued to be subjected to harassment by the Mugabe family and their supporters in South Africa, who want her to drop the case.

At the same press conference, AfriForum announced they had also convinced the NPA to prosecute George Bizos’ son.

Bakground reporting, Ilse de Lange

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.