Harare — Minister of State for Presidential Affairs Didymus Mutasa has filed an urgent chamber application in the High Court seeking to bar a Chinhoyi magistrate from compelling him to testify against his employer in the trial of a former commercial farmer accused of refusing to vacate gazetted land.

Minister Mutasa had been subpoenaed to give evidence in the matter in which a former commercial farmer in Mhangura, Robert Mckersie, is being charged with refusing to vacate Chapungu Farm to pave way for a new farmer.

He pleaded not guilty to the charge and defence lawyer Advocate Thabani Mpofu felt the minister was important in bolstering his client's case.

Prior to his present designation, Minister Mutasa was in charge of the lands and resettlement portfolio in Cabinet.

The minister was last Wednesday issued with a warrant of arrest after he failed to give evidence in the case, but the warrant was cancelled two days later when he attended court for a default inquiry with one of his lawyers Mr Farai Mtamangira.

On the same day, Minister Mutasa approached the High Court challenging magistrate Ngoni Nduna's order compelling him to give evidence against the State in the trial.

High Court judge Justice Bharat Patel is yet to set a date to hear the application.

In the application, Minister Mutasa challenges the subpoena that was served to his office, saying it was defective and that it was served to the wrong people.

In an affidavit by his other lawyer Mr Itai Ndudzo, the minister said he was wrongly cited as Minister of Lands in the Office of the President, a post that is now held by Minister Herbert Murerwa.

"It is common cause that the said subpoena was irregular on the face of it to the extent that it purported that the applicant was the Minister of Lands in the President's Office.

"He is actually the Minister of State responsible for Presidential Affairs. Dr Herbert Murerwa is the Minister of Lands.

"In any event, to the extent that the applicant was required by the defence to testify on matters relating to the exercise of his ministerial function, the applicant should not have been subpoenaed as he is privileged in terms of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act," said Mr Ndudzo.

Mr Ndudzo added that the lower court's decision ordering the minister to testify for the defence was tantamount to testifying against himself and should be stopped immediately before the trial continued.

He said the decision was "not only unconstitutional, but completely untenable".

"I have already stated that the subpoena against the applicant to testify for the defence against the State, constitutes an absurdity.

"On one hand, he represented the acquiring authority during the acquisition of the land.

"He, thus, cannot be called to testify against himself.

"The application is, thus, a legal absurdity, which must be declared void," read Mr Ndudzo's affidavit.

It was also submitted that the evidence required from Minister Mutasa was against public interest.

The minister had also applied for stay of execution of the warrant of arrest, but it is no longer relevant since the warrant has since been cancelled in Chinhoyi.