Former Gweru Mayor’s Case Heads to High Court Over Magistrate Exit
A fresh legal battle has emerged in the trial of former Gweru Mayor Hamutendi Kombayi after Magistrate Arnold Maburo’s dramatic recusal. The accused have urgently approached the High Court in Masvingo, seeking to overturn Maburo’s March 9 ruling, arguing it was riddled with “gross irregularities.” They contend Maburo contradicted himself by dismissing the State’s recusal bid as baseless, only to later step aside. The applicants want the High Court to declare the ruling invalid, dismiss the State’s application, and order the trial to resume before Maburo. The case now raises critical questions about judicial discretion and procedural consistency, with respondents given ten days to oppose.
Dumisani Ndlovu 
A fresh legal battle has erupted in the wake of the dramatic recusal of Gweru Magistrate, Arnold Maburo, with accused persons in the trial of former Gweru Mayor Hamutendi Kombayi now approaching the High Court of Zimbabwe to overturn the decision.
The application, filed in Masvingo, seeks to nullify Maburo’s March 9 ruling in which he stepped aside from the proceedings, arguing that the decision was marred by “gross irregularities” and should be set aside.
The accused are represented by their lawyer Tatenda Zishiri of Kwande Legal Practitioners, while the State was represented by public prosecutor Brandon Ndlovu, acting on behalf of the National Prosecuting Authority.
In their High Court application for review—filed in terms of the High Court Act—the applicants argue that Magistrate Maburo contradicted himself by first upholding a point in limine against the State’s recusal bid, only to proceed to determine the same application on its merits.
They further argue that despite describing the recusal application as “spurious, utterly hopeless, and devoid of merit,” Maburo still chose to step aside—an action they say is legally untenable.
“The irregularities… vitiate the decision of the court a quo,” the applicants submit.
The accused were seeking an order that:
Sets aside the recusal ruling
Substitutes it with a dismissal of the State’s application
Directs that the trial continues before Magistrate Maburo
The case now pits the accused against both Magistrate Maburo (cited in his official capacity) and the National Prosecuting Authority, escalating a dispute that began with controversy over a ballistic report into a full High Court review.
Legal observers say the matter raises a crucial procedural question: can a judicial officer recuse themselves after effectively dismissing the legal basis for recusal?
Respondents have been given ten days to file opposing papers. If no opposition is filed, the matter may proceed unopposed before the High Court in Masvingo.
This latest development deepens the legal drama surrounding Kombayi and transforms the case into a test of judicial reasoning, procedural integrity, and the limits of recusal law in Zimbabwe.
The High Court’s ruling could have far-reaching implications—not only for the accused, but for how courts handle allegations of bias going forward.
