Ivan Zhakata — The Supreme Court has dismissed with costs the appeal disputing the High Court order to release the vehicles of businessman Mr Justice Mayor Wadyajena and his company, Mayor Logistics, that were seized in 2022.

In an interview after the ruling, Mr Wadyajena's lawyer, Mr Oliver Marwa, said the appeal by the National Prosecuting Authority of Zimbabwe (NPAZ) and the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) was dismissed with costs for lacking merit.

"The outcome was that the Supreme Court ruled that the appeal by the National Prosecuting Authority of Zimbabwe, which was contesting the High Court order for NPAZ and ZACC to release the property that was seized by ZACC and the NPAZ from Mayor Logistics and Mayor Wadyajena lacked merit," he said.

"When they brought the matter to the Supreme Court, they wanted the Supreme Court to rule that what the High Court had done was wrong. But the Supreme Court agreed with us that they had no mandate in keeping that property because the High Court judgment by Justice Kwenda was clear that they had 30 days within which to keep that property, but they exceeded two years.

"They had been talking about criminal investigations in the matter that they have to visit America to verify how these properties were acquired, but they have not done anything. This led the Magistrates Court to refuse further remand of Mayor Wadyajena and Mayor Logistics on the charge of fraud and money laundering way back last year. There has been no traction with the ZACC investigation.

"There has been no end in sight for the intended prosecution for our clients. So our clients have always maintained that they were innocent, that those properties were theirs and they were legitimately acquired."

Mr Marwa said if ZACC had anything against his clients, in three years of investigation they would have found something.

"So, in the end, justice has won. We have been vindicated by the Supreme Court this morning," he said. "It has always been clear from our client's arrest that there is nothing that they could hold on to our clients in terms of the criminal offence that they were talking about. If they have got something, let them come forward, but there has been nothing. We have even gone to court to compel them to give us a way forward, to give us a trial date but it has not been forthcoming."