A Zaka Magistrate has acquitted a ruling ZANU PF councillor who had been accused of inciting residents to protest against President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
Zivanai Zvida (44) councillor for Ward 24 in Zaka District, Masvingo Province was arrested on 1 April 2025 and charged with incitement to commit public violence under the Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Act.
Prosecutors alleged that on 31 March 2025, Zvida posted a message in a WhatsApp group for residents titled Ward 24 Development Agents which read: “M31 Movement Munhu wese mu road Emmerson Mnangagwa has to go”.
They argued that the message was intended to persuade members of the public to disturb peace and security by demonstrating against the president.
Zvida, who was reportedly an administrator of the WhatsApp group alongside several other local party officials, denied the charge.
The trial began on 29 January 2026 at Zaka Magistrates Court before Magistrate Grace Tupiri. The state relied on testimony from three witnesses including the investigating officer and a digital forensic analyst from the police cyber laboratory.
Police had confiscated Zvida’s Samsung Galaxy mobile phone for forensic examination following his arrest.
He spent 16 days in police and prison custody after being denied bail by the magistrates’ court on the grounds that he posed a threat to public order and security. He was later released on 17 April 2025 after being granted bail by the Masvingo High Court.
On 4 February 2026, Magistrate Tupiri upheld an application for discharge filed at the close of the prosecution’s case by his lawyer, Frank Chirairo of Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR), leading to his acquittal.
In the application, Zvida argued that the evidence presented by the state was “so manifestly unreliable that no reasonable court could safely act on it”.
He maintained that the allegedly offensive words had not been proven to have been sent by him or posted in the Ward 24 Development Agents WhatsApp group.
In her ruling, Magistrate Tupiri said two of the state witnesses had made “bold assertions” without submitting evidence upon which a reasonable court could rely to convict.
Following the judgment, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights said the acquittal highlighting the importance of courts scrutinising evidence in cases involving freedom of expression and alleged incitement.
ZLHR said the ruling demonstrated that allegations of online misconduct must be supported by credible and verifiable digital evidence before criminal liability can be established.
The case is the latest to test the boundaries of political speech and public order laws in the country where authorities have previously defended such prosecutions as necessary to maintain peace and stability.
