State Gets Permission to Call Judge Sylvia Chirau-Mugomba to Testify in Fraud Case Involving Gospel Musician Ivy Kombo
Magistrate Allows Testimony of High Court Judge Amid Legal Dispute
The State has been granted permission to call High Court Judge Sylvia Chirau-Mugomba to testify in the ongoing fraud trial involving gospel musician Ivy Kombo and her husband, Admire Kasi. The couple is accused of unlawfully acquiring conversion certificates that allowed them to practice law in Zimbabwe.
The testimony will follow significant legal efforts led by State prosecutor Anesu Chirenje. Initially, the presiding magistrate had dismissed the application to summon Judge Chirau-Mugomba, but a recent ruling reversed that decision. Magistrate Taurai Manuwere, speaking on behalf of Magistrate Feresi Chakanyuka, stated that calling Mugomba would not prejudice the accused.
“The accused persons will suffer no prejudice, as they are the ones who introduced this document and cross-examined State witnesses on it,” said Magistrate Manuwere. “The author of the document should come and testify. The accused chose to withhold this document during investigations and only introduced it during trial.”
The trial, which is expected to continue on June 6, could be concluded by Mugomba’s testimony, which is crucial to the case. Mugomba, who chairs the Council of Legal Education (CLE), allegedly wrote a letter authorizing the couple’s exemption from taking conversion exams, a requirement for practicing law. These exams consist of eight subjects.
Chirenje emphasized the importance of Mugomba’s testimony, suggesting that the case may not succeed if the judge confirms the exemption.
The defense team, however, has strongly opposed the application. They argue that allowing the judge to testify mid-trial would be unfair and accuse the State of attempting to introduce new evidence after the case had already started. The defense also contends that it is unlawful to investigate and prosecute the same case at the same time and that they had not prepared to address this new line of defense.
The case continues to unfold as both parties await further developments in the coming trial dates.
