Justice in The Shadows: The Job Sikhala Animated Chronicles”

[Dark, Rainy Night at a Prison]
– The scene opens on a stormy night, lightning illuminates a gloomy prison. Inside, we see JOB SIKHALA, an innocent legislator, solemnly sitting in his cell, papers scattered around showing legal texts and case files.

[Flashback Sequence]
– The colour picture shifts to showing quick scenes of Sikhala’s journey, his advocacy, the late Moreblessing Ali (a mother of two), and glimpses of the dark figures who orchestrated her murder. We see Sikhala’s fierce determination in the courtroom, and then his subsequent unlawful arrest, emphasizing the injustice.

[Back in the Cell]
– The scene snaps back to the present, the color returns, Sikhala rises, determination in his eyes. He’s seen writing fervently, preparing for the next court session, surrounded by books and papers. The clock ticks loudly, signaling the impending showdown.

[The Courtroom Drama]
– The next morning, in a grand courtroom, the JUDGE, an imposing figure, enters. The room is full, the air thick with anticipation. Sikhala, now in a suit, stands confidently. He is not just a defendant; he represents the pursuit of justice.

– As the trial commences, dramatic music plays. The PROSECUTION, shadowy figures, present a twisted version of events. We see ghostly images of the real perpetrators, the instigators in the background, their smirks and whispers visualizing the corruption and conspiracy.

[Turning Point]
– Sikhala takes the floor, the music crescendos. With passion and truth, he speaks not only for himself but for every unjustly treated soul, highlighting the cruel irony of being judged by those who should be his allies in justice.

– Animated flashbacks, facts, and evidence appear around him as he speaks, the scenes from Moreblessing’s life, and her children left behind. The courtroom sees the reality of the perpetrators, visualized as dark specters fading under the weight of Sikhala’s words.

[The Judge’s Dilemma]
– The Judge, under the spotlight, sweats as the gravity of the truth bears down. Scenes flash in his mind’s eye, the reality of the injustice, the cruel twist of the law he’s meant to uphold. The gavel in his hand feels heavier than ever.

[The Verdict & Aftermath]
– Time slows down as the Judge makes his decision. He finally sees the case for what it truly is. With a strike that echoes, he demands justice for Sikhala, calling for a higher investigation into the real murderers, a scene depicted as shadows being chased by light.

– The court erupts in animated cheers, the figures of Moreblessing and other innocents smiling down from the heavens. Sikhala, vindicated, steps out into the sunlight, the horizon promising a new chapter for justice.

[The End Frame]
– The story concludes with a note: “For every voice silenced, another speaks in echoes. Justice prevails.” The scene fades to black, the soft sound of rain signifying cleansing and hope.

By Farai D Hove | CCC politician Job Sikhala, who is appealing against both conviction and sentence on a charge of obstructing the course of justice, is seeking the recusal of one of the two judges hearing his appeal.
Justice Pisirayi Kwenda and Justice Benjamin Chikowero were yesterday expected to hear Sikhala’s appeal, but his lawyers made an interlocutory application for the recusal of Justice Chikowero claiming bias against Sikhala.

The judges heard Sikhala’s application, which the prosecution strenuously opposed, and reserved their ruling to November 14.

The prosecution argued that recusal is not a method of first resort. There are many requirements that must be met before a judge can be removed from a case, both from a procedural standpoint and on the merits. Prosecutors were supposed to zealously oppose any attempt to remove a judge that does not meet the standards of recusal.

Sikhala was in May this year convicted and fined US$600 for obstruction of justice after he posted on social media a video relating to the murder of Ms Moreblessing Ali and the violence that ensued in Nyatsime sometime last year. The court ordered him to pay the fine by May 5 or risk serving six months in prison.

Additionally, another six months were wholly suspended on the condition that he does not commit a similar crime in the next five years.

However, Sikhala remained in custody as he had three other pending cases before the criminal courts.

Meanwhile, Transform Zimbabwe leader Jacob Ngarivhume will have to wait a little longer to have his appeal against a public violence conviction and a three-year jail term after the High Court deferred the hearing to November 14.

Justice Chikowero deferred the hearing to next month at the request of the prosecution to allow a new counsel, who took over the matter, to adequately prepare. The new prosecutor asked for more time to prepare and submit their heads of argument. The defence did not oppose the request.

Ngarivhume is appealing against both conviction and sentence for inciting public violence arising from Twitter messages where he called for people to engage in public violence or join an illegal demonstration in July 2020.

Following his conviction, Ngarivhume approached the High Court seeking bail pending appeal but Justice Chikowero threw out the application.

The judge ruled that there were no prospects of success in the appeal against conviction. On the appeal against sentence, the judge thought Ngarivhume had prospects of success but would still serve a considerable period of time in jail. So the application for bail pending appeal was rejected.

n convicting Ngarivhume, the trial magistrate had found that the politician had made the Twitter posts, and the content met the criteria required by the charge.

Ngarivhume had initially on arrest agreed he had posted the tweets, but said his posts were protected by the Constitutional right of free speech. Later in court, he had argued that the Twitter handle had never belonged to him.

The State proved that Ngarivhume, through his actions, wanted or meant to incite the public to act in a disastrous and violent manner, according to the lower court’s ruling. The court then decided that only an effective prison term would send a strong message to likely offenders that violence was frowned upon.

The decision to send Ngarivhume to jail was guided by the criminal laws of the country as to the sentence because once convicted of inciting members of the public to commit a crime, the accused had to be sentenced in accordance with the law and precedent.