Lawyer questions involvement of terrorism unit in Blessed Mhlanga’s journalism case
SUPPORT: Journalist Blessed Mhlanga in the dock, supported by Former Finance Minister Tendai Biti
The bail hearing of Alpha Media Holdings (AMH) senior reporter Blessed Mhlanga saw a heated exchange in court on Tuesday, as his lawyer, Chris Mhike, challenged the involvement of the Counter Terrorism Unit in a case centered on journalism.
The core of the dispute revolved around the state’s assertion that Mhlanga’s reporting, specifically the dissemination of videos featuring calls for President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s resignation, constituted incitement to public violence.
During cross-examination, Mhike pressed Detective Josphat Chitamira from the CID Counter Terrorism Unit on the rationale behind their involvement.
“Why are you involved in a journalism case?” Mhike asked, challenging the officer’s presence.
The officer responded that he was not treating the case as terrorism and that his involvement stemmed from “administrative assignments.”
Mhike further questioned, “Do you believe my client is a terrorist?” The officer declined to answer directly, stating, “Belief has nothing to do with facts.” When pressed further, the officer admitted, “I don’t know if he is a terrorist.”
Mhike then questioned the deployment of a counter-terrorism expert on a journalist, to which the officer replied, “There’s nothing wrong with it.”
The focus then shifted to the specifics of the alleged offence. The officer stated that Mhlanga “transmitted data” via YouTube, specifically through the channel HSTV.
When questioned about Mhlanga’s connection to HSTV, the officer admitted he did not know Mhlanga’s full name and acknowledged that HSTV is not a “natural person, but rather natural persons acting on its behalf.”
Mhike argued that the state had failed to provide sufficient evidence to deny his client bail. He emphasised that Mhlanga’s actions were those of a journalist performing his duties.
Mhike stated, “It’s not a crime to disseminate information,” and “freedom for the media will not lead to violence.” He further argued that section 50 of the constitution favors bail.
The state opposed bail, citing concerns that Mhlanga would interfere with witnesses, who are his workmates, and that he might continue to disseminate similar content. The state also claimed that the equipment used in the alleged offence had not been recovered.
The state argued Mhlanga “is not a proper candidate to be admitted for bail” due to his senior position at his workplace and the possibility of him influencing witnesses.
They also stated that “he is likely to continue disseminating such data which may lead to him to commit offences” and “He may have access to the said equipment- cameras, inciting public violence.”
Mhike countered that the state had not provided compelling reasons to deny bail, and proposed a bail amount of US$100, along with conditions that Mhlanga reside at his given address and not interfere with state witnesses.
The case centres on Mhlanga’s coverage of press conferences held by Zanu-PF central committee member Blessed Geza and other war veterans, who called for President Mnangagwa’s resignation.
The state alleges that Mhlanga’s dissemination of these videos constituted incitement to public violence.
Harare regional magistrate Farai Gwatima is set to rule on the bail application on February 27th.
About Post Author
