HARARE – Journalist Edmund Kudzayi has been ordered by the High Court to pay US$100,000 defamation damages to lawyer and former opposition MP, Fadzayi Mahere.
Mahere sued Kudzayi in 2022 accusing him of publishing a defamatory story on his WhatsApp news platform, Kukurigo.
High Court judge Joel Mambara granted a default judgement against Kudzayi after his defence was struck out.
The judge also slapped Kudzayi with costs.
The judge ordered: “Whereupon, after reading documents filed of record and hearing counsel it is ordered that plaintiff’s claim be and is hereby granted.
“The defendant shall pay the plaintiff the sum of US$100,000 or the equivalent thereof in local currency at the rate of exchange prevailing at the time of payment.
“The defendant shall pay interest on the above amount at the prescribed rate namely 5 percent per annum from the date of service of summons to the date of payment.
“The defendant shall pay plaintiff’s costs of suit.”
It is the biggest defamation award in Zimbabwean history.
Kudzayi said he would appeal the judgement as he accused Justice Neville Wamambo, who dealt with the matter in its earlier stages, of being a “criminal judge.”
Mahere, said Kudzayi, is a “criminal practitioner who ought to be struck off.”
“Celebrations are premature. The substantive battle is yet to begin…,” Kudzayi wrote on Kukurigo.
He accuses the High Court of twice reinstating Mahere’s lawsuit after it was struck off the roll, he claims after Mahere made some misrepresentations to game the legal process. She denies the allegations.
Kudzayi’s troubles started after he alleged that Mahere was dating a married businessman Tinashe Murapata, further accusing the lawyer of causing the collapse of Murapata’s marriage.
Mahere said the articles were designed to damage her personal and professional reputation, without any attempt at reporting information which was true or in the public interest.
Mahere’s lawyers argued: “In the article itself, it was confirmed that neither Ms. Mahere nor Mr. Murapata had confirmed any of the allegations set out in the article, and that ‘efforts to contract the estranged wife were unsuccessful.’
“It is therefore clear that the author of the article made no attempt to establish the veracity of his claims, and had no direct sources for the claims made, and was relying simply on the hearsay of third parties.”