High Court strikes Madhuku, Biti’s lawsuit against police off urgent roll

The High Court has struck off the urgent roll an application by prominent lawyers Lovemore Madhuku and Tendai Biti, who are suing the police over alleged assaults and interference with private meetings held to discuss proposed constitutional amendments.

Justice Pisirayi Kwenda removed the matter from the urgent roll, effectively halting its immediate hearing.

The applicants’ lawyer, Alec Muchadehama, confirmed the development and indicated that they intend to challenge the ruling once full reasons are provided.

“Judgement has been handed down and the matter was removed from the urgent roll,” Muchadehama said.

“We want to appeal but we are waiting for a full judgement because now we do not know the reasons for his decision as yet”.

The application was filed last month by the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), Madhuku and Biti against the Minister of Home Affairs and the Zimbabwe Republic Police Commissioner-General. The applicants accuse police of disrupting private meetings and, in some instances, facilitating or failing to prevent violent attacks by unidentified assailants.

The dispute arises against the backdrop of intensifying debate over the proposed Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No. 3 Bill, 2026, which has triggered political and civic contestation.

In his founding affidavit, Madhuku detailed an alleged violent incident on March 1 at Bumbiro House in central Harare, which houses his law firm, where members of the NCA had gathered for what he described as a private meeting.

“As we were about to start our meeting, I was alerted to persons breaking the gate to the entrance demanding to gain entry into the premises,” Madhuku said.

He told the court that he encountered five men wearing balaclavas who allegedly assaulted him.

“They started saying that I was giving them problems. They then started to beat me with truncheons all over my body,” he said.

Madhuku described the attack as prolonged and brutal, saying: “The beating lasted for about ten minutes. The beating was severe, savage, and sadistic. It was intrinsically barbaric. It appears as if I was being assaulted by zombies.”

He further alleged that police officers who were present outside the premises failed to intervene.

“From the broken gate, I could see that the Police could see and hear that I was being beaten. Either our assailants were Police officers or their accomplices. I find the acts and omissions of the police quite reprehensible,” he said.

According to Madhuku, the violence triggered panic among attendees, with some fleeing by scaling the perimeter wall, while others who attempted to intervene were also assaulted. He said he was later hospitalised after sustaining blunt trauma injuries.

The applicants argue that the meeting was private and did not require notification under the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act (MOPA).

“In terms of the Maintenance of Peace and Order Act, we were not obliged to notify the police of the meeting. Bumbiro House is a private place and our meeting was not a public gathering,” Madhuku said.

He accused police of unlawfully interfering with constitutionally protected rights, including freedom of assembly, dignity and personal security.

“It is unlawful for members of the Police to prevent, disrupt or in any way interfere with members of the public’s meetings in private places,” he said.

In a supporting affidavit, Biti alleged similar disruptions, including a February 28 meeting at the Zimbabwe Women’s Bureau in Harare that he said was blocked by police despite prior notification.

“I have no doubt that what the Police are doing is to prevent me and others from discussing the Constitution of Zimbabwe (Amendment) No. 3 Bill, 2026,” Biti said.