STATE ADMITS TORTURING MUKOKO

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 HARARE 000524 SENSITIVE SIPDIS AF/S FOR B. WALCH DRL FOR N. WILETT ADDIS ABABA FOR USAU ADDIS ABABA FOR ACSS NSC FOR SENIOR AFRICA DIRECTOR M. GAVIN STATE PASS TO USAID FOR L.DOBBINS AND E.LOKEN E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM ASEC KDEM PGOV PREL ZI SUBJECT: STATE ADMITS TORTURING MUKOKO REF: 08 HARARE 1147 HARARE 00000524 001.3 OF 003 -------------- SUMMARY -------------- ¶1. (SBU) On June 24, the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe heard a landmark case brought by human rights activist Jestina Mukoko, arguing that her abduction, torture, and illegal detention in December 2008 constituted such a grave violation of her constitutional rights that the court should permanently stay the prosecution's case against her for allegedly conspiring to mount an armed insurgency against the government in the post-election period last year. In the court room, crowded with onlookers including numerous diplomats, journalists, and leaders of civil society, the State argued that although her rights were violated, there are other remedies available (i.e. civil law suits). Shockingly, the prosecutor admitted that Mukoko had been illegally abducted, tortured, and detained during a horrific three week period in December 2008. END SUMMARY. -------------- Mukoko's Rights Violated -------------- ¶2. (U) In nearly two hours of argument, Mukoko's lawyer, distinguished South African advocate Jeremy Gauntlet, detailed her abduction and the degrading treatment and torture she experienced in illegal State custody between December 3 and 22, 2008. Mukoko, a Zimbabwe Peace Project (ZPP) colleague, and other MDC activists are accused of recruiting insurgents to launch an armed rebellion from Botswana. Mukoko cried silently at times as Gauntlet read from Mukoko's written affidavit (reftel),describing how State agents beat her on the soles of her feet and forced her to kneel for hours on sharp gravel. Gauntlet acknowledged that the State could only permanently stay prosecution in "exceptional" cases and said, ironically, he was "not confident" that Mukoko's case of abduction and human rights violations was exceptional in Zimbabwe. He laid out the three main questions for the court to decide: (1) What are the facts and what evidence has the State presented against Mukoko? (2) Do the facts establish a violation of Mukoko's rights? and (3) What does the State do when evidence is brought forth with "dirty hands"? He described Mukoko's case as a "textbook" example of a case in which the court hould stay the prosecution because of how consistently and severely her rights were violated. ¶3. (U) The evidence against Mukoko, importantly, is based on a confession she made while illegally detained and after being tortured by State security agents between December 3 and 22, 2008. Others who face similar banditry charges were also abducted and tortured to confess to various roles in the plot. To support his argument, Gauntlet presented affidavits previously submitted by Minister of State Security, Didymus Mutasa, and police QMinister of State Security, Didymus Mutasa, and police superintendent Peter Magwenzi (Magwenzi received Mukoko and over a dozen other blindfolded abductees from State security agents into his custody on December 22). Both Mutasa and Magwenzi acknowledged that Mukoko and others were in the custody of State agents prior to being turned over to police. Gauntlet pointed out that the State has never contested the veracity of Mukoko's claims nor sought to investigate the actions of those officers who abducted or tortured her. Indeed, Mutasa's own statement acknowledged that he was aware that State agents had been authorized to act without any identifiable power under Zimbabwe's constitution or laws. ¶4. (U) Gauntlet concluded by identifying nine specific violations of HARARE 00000524 002.5 OF 003 Mukoko's constitutional and human rights: -- Her abduction by State agents on December 3, 2008; -- The degrading and inhumane treatments she was subjected to when removed from her home (not allowed to change from her dressing gown or to retrieve her glasses; in the vehicle her face was forced in the lap of one of her male abductors); -- Her unlawful detention between December 3 and 22, 2008; -- Her unlawful solitary confinement during that period; -- Her torture in detention during that period; -- The death threats her abductors used to taunt and intimidate her during that period; -- Her unlawful deprivation of medical care, even with a court order after she was taken to Chikurubi prison; -- Her unlawful deprivation of legal practitioners, even after she was taken to the police on December 22, 2008; and -- The "cumulative connivance" of police, unnamed State agents who abducted and tortured her, the Minister of State Security (Mutasa), and the Attorney General who consciously sought to undermine her dignity. -------------- Prosecutor: Tomana's Sacrificial Lamb -------------- ¶5. (SBU) State prosecutor Fatima Maxwell, the head of the civil law division in the AG's office, appeared extraordinarily ill prepared and did not even attempt to dispute the facts of Mukoko's abduction in her very short 20 minute counter argument. Maxwell weakly argued that an affidavit submitted by Minister Mutasa--that explicitly states that Jestina was in the custody of State security agents--shouldn't be admitted because the case it was part of had been withdrawn. She then pointed out two minor discrepancies in Mukoko's oral and written testimony. (Was her head forced down on the lap of one of her abductors or on the seat of the car? And did she see a sign before or after they blindfolded her?) In Mukoko's 35 pages of oral testimony, the State could only identify these two minor differences with her written testimony. Notably, Maxwell did not dispute any of the facts presented of Mukoko's abduction or torture nor of the State's efforts to protect and defend the actors involved. ¶6. (SBU) As he questioned Maxwell, Chief Justice Chidyasiku --who is viewed as compromised and a defender of the ZANU-PF regime -- identified various technical points in the case that the AG's office could use to strengthen its case. Nevertheless, he described the details of Mukoko's abduction as "an exceptional violation" of her rights. The State prosecutor agreed that Mukoko's rights had been violated and that her detention between December 3 and 22 was unlawful. -------------- AG "Scared" -------------- ¶7. (SBU) Before presenting the State's case, Maxwell confided to Q7. (SBU) Before presenting the State's case, Maxwell confided to our political assistant that AG Johannes Tomana and the government's chief prosecutor Florence Ziyambi were "scared" of the case. Maxwell also told Mukoko's lawyers that she didn't want to be there to present the State's case. Before the hearing, most lawyers expected that either Tomana or Ziyambi would present the State's case. After the hearing, human rights lawyers described Maxwell's timid performance as "a joke." Mukoko told us that even she felt sorry for Maxwell. HARARE 00000524 003.3 OF 003 -------------- Ruling Delayed -------------- ¶8. (SBU) As was expected, the Supreme Court is reserving judgment and the ruling could take two or three months. Mukoko's trial in the High Court is scheduled to begin on July 20, and the Supreme Court will likely take some action before then, if only to delay the trial while the ruling is pending. While this case only dealt explicitly with Mukoko, the other abductees facing similar charges have referred similar cases to the Supreme Court. Lawyers hope that this case will serve as precedent. -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶9. (SBU) Regardless of the final ruling, the Supreme Court hearing is significant because, finally, government officials have admitted that Mukoko was illegally abducted and tortured by State agents. Furthermore, the State has done absolutely nothing to investigate the actions of the State agents who abducted and tortured her. As we continue to push for rule of law and improved human rights conditions, the international community can now cite these admissions as incontrovertible evidence of the government's wrongdoing and the impunity with which State agents continue to violate human rights. The government knows who ordered and carried out the abductions, torture, and forced confessions--if only they will hold the perpetrators accountable. END COMMENT. MCGEE