TERROR IN HIGH COURT AS JUDGES GET HARASSED BY ADVOCATE THABANI MPOFU.

BY DR MASIMBA MAVAZA

In an ongoing case where a top lawyer with an inflated ego made a complaint that Justice Katiyo had issued a “made-up order,” the High Court yesterday rescinded the order.

Justice Never Katiyo of the Harare High Court issued an extraordinary order setting aside the judgement in question, which is in a dispute between a Bulgarian company and a local entity accused of hijacking its properties.

The matter is a simple matter which was blown out of proportion by Advocate Mpofu, who has added a political flare to the matter.

Social media has put up the matter in a way meant to tarnish Judge Katiyo.

In a court order dated August 7, Justice Katiyo formally rescinded the July 28 ruling, citing procedural error.

“Judgement which was erroneously issued on 28 July 2025 under case number HCH6784/19 be and is hereby rescinded,” the order, made in terms of Rule 29 of the High Court Rules, 2021, reads.

It is therefore surprising that Advocate Thabani Mpofu has taken this case to Social media.
It is not correct that Advocate Mpofu never appeared before Justice Katiyo.

Mpofu has appeared in court before Justice Katiyo in this matter not once but several times. He has made several submissions, and the record clearly shows that Advocate Thabani Mpofu has appeared in court.

In this casethree parties are appearing before Justice Katiyo. These are Advocate Sanhanga and Advocate Uriri.

WHY DID JUSTICE KATIYO WITHDRAW THE JUDGEMENT?
From the start, the judgment that was issued was issued in error.

It was a draft judgement which was not meant to be issued.
In Zimbabwe, judges can withdraw a judgment made in error under certain circumstances.

In law, the terms “mistake” and “error” are often used interchangeably, but there can be subtle differences in their connotations and applications.

Mistake

A mistake typically refers to an unintended or unforeseen act or decision that can be attributed to inadvertence or a lapse in judgment.

In law, mistakes can be categorized into different types, such as:
Mistake of fact:
A misunderstanding or incorrect assumption about a fact can affect the outcome of a case.
Mistake of law:
A misunderstanding or incorrect interpretation of the law.

Error.
An error, on the other hand, often implies a more fundamental or systemic flaw in reasoning, judgment, or procedure. In law, errors can refer to:

Errors of law:

A misapplication or misinterpretation of the law can lead to an incorrect outcome.

– Errors of procedure: A failure to follow proper procedures or protocols that can affect the fairness or validity of a case.

While both mistakes and errors can have significant consequences in legal proceedings, the key difference lies in their nature and implications.

Mistakes might be seen as more individual or isolated incidents, whereas errors can imply a more systemic or fundamental problem.

In Zimbabwean law, courts have recognized the importance of distinguishing between mistakes and errors, particularly in the context of procedural fairness and the rule of law.

Judge Never Katiyo is currently embroiled in controversy after lawyer Advocate Thabani Mpofu accused him of fabricating a court appearance in a judgment handed down on July 28, 2025.

The case in question is Technoimpex JSC v Rajendrakumar Jogi & Others (Case No. HCH6784/19).

Mpofu claims that not only did he not appear before Justice Katiyo, but the matter is still pending and scheduled for argument on September 15.

Mpofu made the following Key allegations
Fabrication of Court Appearance: Mpofu alleges that Judge Katiyo falsely recorded him as appearing in court and making submissions.

This allegation is not only wrong, but it is highly malicious. Advocate Thabani appeared in court and made submissions.

He has submitted several pleadings.

It is surprising that the other parties to the case have remained silent and have not come out in defence of Justice Katiyo.

It should be noted that when Judges write their judgments no lawyer will be present.

For the avoidance of doubt, judgments are written in Chambers.

Despite knowing that he appeared before Justice Katiyo, the Prominent lawyer Advocate Thabani Mpofu has accused a High Court judge of manufacturing a judgement in which he said he was falsely recorded as having appeared in court.
In a letter dated July 30, Advocate Mpofu wrote to the Registrar of the High Court, alleging that Justice Never Katiyo fabricated both his appearance and arguments in a ruling handed down two days earlier in the matter of Technoimpex JSC v Rajendrakumar Jogi & Others (Case No. HCH6784/19).

“It is not true that I appeared before his lordship and made those submissions. In my view, the judgment is made up,” wrote Mpofu.

The judgment, issued on July 28, states that Mpofu represented the applicant, Technoimpex JSC, and outlines legal submissions made by him in response to objections raised by the respondents.

The records and other parties clearly show that Mpofu not only did he appeared before Justice Katiyo, but he also made the submissions cited in the draft judgment.

The matter that is still pending and scheduled for argument on September 15 is a historical case tied to the case with the judgment issued and rescinded.

• Judgment Issued was a draft judgment issued in error, that’s why it was without a Hearing. The judgment was issued without mentioning a hearing date, and Mpofu’s law firm, Sinyoro & Partners, because it was a draft issued in error.
• Procedural Misstep: The judgment centered on the finding that the deponent to the applicant’s affidavit was not properly authorized by a board resolution. This, in any case, any judge who will take this case up will surely have reasoned as in the draft. Nothing in the draft is far from what Mpofu had submitted.
  Mpofu has a very clear agenda to eliminate all judges perceived to be aligned with ZANU PF.
• This is a systematic harassment of judges by Thabani Mpofu. He clearly and freely roams in the judicial corridors, wreaking havoc. He insists on no appearance when he fully knows that he has appeared. Insisting on no appearance is meant to make Judge Katiyo appear incompetent.
• Unfortunately, Judges can not respond to the media, and their names are dragged through the mud. Those who are meant to defend them make a very, very loud silence. What a betrayal of the judges.
  Mpofu makes very dangerous allegations, which raise troubling implications about the accuracy and authorship of judicial decisions. His allegations will raise a Potential Tribunal hearing against the judge. They shake the real strength of our judicial system. Mpofu is not only a danger to Katiyo but to all judges.
  If substantiated, the allegations could trigger a tribunal to investigate Judge Katiyo’s fitness to stay in office, and because of this, Mpofu must be disciplined for making false allegations against a judge of the High Court.
  It’s worth noting that Judge Katiyo has not publicly responded to the allegations, and the High Court, Judicial Service Commission, and Justice Katiyo’s office have yet to comment on the matter.
  The rescinding of the judgment does not mean that there was a sinister move in the proceedings.
  Rule 29(1) allows a judge, either on his initiative or on request from the parties, to correct, rescind or set aside a decision granted in error or erroneously. It doesn’t look at how the error occurred. This is done on notice to the interested parties, and they do not necessarily have to be present. It is not anything new, as this is a daily occurrence during the practice of law by judges. It is not only practiced in Zimbabwe but in many jurisdictions like South Africa, Botswana, Eswatini and Namibia. This clause is meant to protect the office of the judge, given the pressure associated with the job; otherwise, no judge would last even 4 months in office. There is no need for all the excitement that we witness with the media, as errors are bound to happen. How many stories have we read about errors in other areas, even in medical practice, where samples have been taken from patients, only for the results to be given to a different patient? Some of these samples could relate to life-threatening conditions such as cancer, but corrections are made. In this particular case of Judge Katiyo, there is a hidden hand being used to achieve a certain agenda.

Mpofu’s sinister political move in Judicial corridors is seen here, where the issues related to do with the judge’s interviews and subsequent appointment by His Excellency the President come in.

Judge Katiyo is the same judge who was demonised left, right, and centre before, during and after the 2023 general elections.

This very same lawyer, Advocate Thabani Mpofu, is involved in many of those petitions that were made against Justice Katiyo.

It is not surprising that he is taking everything to the media to please his constituents and handlers after disappointing them in 2023.

We had a case where a senior lawyer apologised for falsifying more than 12 cases in the Supreme Court.

It simply means mistakes happen and one cannot be crucified for that.

What is surprising in this case is that every word uttered purportedly by the judge finds its way to the press.

The speed at which things are done in chambers reaches the press shows a well organised machinery meant to dismantle our judges.

Every reasoning person would have thought the outcry was about wrong judgement, which judgement has been rescinded without any of the parties incurring costs of further applications.

So, who is leaking the information to the press? There is politics at play here.

Thabani is after the judge, as we saw with Justice Chinamhora, who is now proudly the chairman of the prestigious commission.

This is an agenda for 2028 to rid all judges perceived to be patriotic to the cause of Zimbabwe to effect regime change.

Lest we forget how this judge was harassed.

I thought the rescission of that judgment brought the issue to an end, so why the noise?
In rescinding the judgement many issues are looked at

• Procedural Irregularities: If there’s a procedural error or irregularity in the judgment, the court can review and potentially withdraw the judgment. This can include situations where there was a misdirection or failure to follow proper procedures, or a genuine glaring mistake.
  In law, the terms “mistake” and “error” are often used interchangeably, but there can be subtle differences in their connotations and applications

In Zimbabwean law, courts have recognized the importance of distinguishing between mistakes and errors, particularly in the context of procedural fairness and the rule of law.
Error in Judgment: If a judge realizes that a judgment was made in error, they can correct it. This might involve reconsidering the evidence or re-evaluating the application of the law. In some cases, a judge might withdraw a judgment if it’s found to be fundamentally flawed. Some notable cases in Zimbabwe where judgments were reviewed or set aside include Robert Gumbura vs The State: The Supreme Court reviewed a judgment and guided on procedural matters.
Tapiwa Madya vs The State: The court considered the issue of absolution from the instance and judicial deference. Valentine Ziswa and Margaret Ziswa vs Graeme Chadwick and Landos Farm (Private) Limited: The court reviewed a judgment and provided insights into procedural law.
It’s worth noting that the Zimbabwean judiciary has mechanisms in place to ensure that judgments are fair and just. If a judgment is found to be erroneous, the court can take steps to correct it and ensure that justice is served.
Advocate Thabani Mpofu was recorded in the judgement as having appeared for the applicant, Technoimpex JSC, because he indeed appeared and that the attributions to him are true and correct.
The only issue is that the judgement was a draft which was issued in error. When the judge uploaded the case from the portal, a draft was uploaded.
Even though the judgement clearly showed that its uploading background is shrouded in error.
The reason why Thabani Mpofu is insisting on fallacy is because he wants to see Justice Katiyo facing an inquiry by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), which has the power to recommend that the president establish a tribunal to assess a judge’s fitness to remain on the bench, should it find that their conduct brings the judiciary into disrepute.
Katiyo. Comes another judge whose matter is dealt with by the media, and none of those who are supposed to help him are lifting a finger. The case pits Technoimpex JSC, a foreign-registered company, against several Zimbabwean individuals and entities, including Rajendrakumar Jogi, Sarah Hwingwiri, and a locally registered clone company — Technoimpex JSC (Private) Limited — which is laying claim to a prime real estate asset: Bath Mansions Flats, located at 32 Bath Road in Avondale, Harare.
The legal fight revolves around ownership of the property and whether the Bulgarian company had the proper authority to sue. Technoimpex’s application was supported by an affidavit from one Borislav Boynov, who purported to act under a special power of attorney.

In the original judgement — now set aside — Justice Katiyo sided with the respondents, holding that the company had failed to prove that Boynov was authorised by a board resolution to act on its behalf. He ruled that the absence of such a resolution was fatal to the company’s case.
“In short, there is no legal proceeding before the court by the company, given the want of authority,” the withdrawn ruling had concluded.

While the legal reasoning in the case remains open to argument, it is the fact that no hearing ever took place that has shaken the legal community.
Both Mpofu and Technoimpex’s lawyers, Sinyoro & Partners, confirmed the matter was still pending and had been set down for hearing on September 15. But they are forgetting that the judgment is about the case they appeared in and are still appearing in. This loud-sounding nothing is just a ploy to make it look scandalous. The behaviour of Mpofu is appalling, and unfortunately for Justice, the JSC seeks to please Mpofu, who is actually on a mission and is using JSC to participate in the Judicial bombing.
Advocate Thabani Mpofu has become a legal terrorist and not a legal guru.
If Thabani is not reigned in, many Judges will be next.
Thabani wants to be feared, and he boasts of having the support of the senior judges and those who appoint judges.
Katiyo issue is a coup being led by Thabani Mpofu, and those who are supposed to defend us are busy clapping their hands.
Mr Walter Chikwana for the JSC has not commented yet.

The JSC should read between the lines and protect the integrity of the judges.