Justice Chiweshe: Misconduct Hearing Launched After Kereke Complaint

• Supreme Court Justice George Mutandwa Chiweshe faces disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Judicial Service Commission over a complaint from convicted rapist Munyaradzi Kereke.
• Kereke alleges Justice Chiweshe engaged in impropriety, including associating with Kereke's wives, while Kereke was imprisoned and his appeal was pending before a bench that included Chiweshe.
• The Chief Justice referred the matter for investigation under the Judicial Service (Code of Ethics) Regulations, 2012, with specific terms of reference focusing on private contact and financial dealings.
• Justice Chiweshe has filed an urgent High Court application to stop the disciplinary hearing, arguing the investigation committee expanded its mandate beyond the initial referral.
• Kereke's original complaint also implicated two other judges, but only Justice Chiweshe was referred for disciplinary action.

Justice Chiweshe has challenged these proceedings by filing an urgent High Court application on September 4, 2026, seeking to halt the disciplinary hearing scheduled for September 9, 2026.

Supreme Court Justice George Mutandwa Chiweshe is currently facing disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) following a serious complaint lodged by convicted rapist Munyaradzi Kereke. The allegations center on claims of repeated impropriety, specifically that Justice Chiweshe enjoyed the company of two of Kereke's wives while Kereke was serving a 10-year jail sentence. These proceedings could ultimately lead to Justice Chiweshe's removal from the bench.

Kereke's complaint stems from a period when Justice Chiweshe was part of a three-judge Supreme Court panel that dismissed Kereke's appeal against his conviction and sentence for raping his 14-year-old niece. Kereke's appeal was rejected on May 31, 2024, sending him back to prison to complete his sentence, which he finished on January 8, 2026. The complaint, filed in June 2026, asserts that the alleged misconduct occurred while Kereke's criminal appeal was still pending before the Supreme Court.

The Judicial Service Commission formally commenced disciplinary action against Justice Chiweshe after Chief Justice Elizabeth Gwaunza, having reviewed Kereke’s complaint and Chiweshe’s response, determined on July 30, 2026, that the alleged conduct might have violated section 7(1) of the Judicial Service (Code of Ethics) Regulations, 2012. A committee was constituted to investigate, initially comprising Justice Anne Mary Gowora, Justice Benjamin Hlatshwayo, and Justice Faith Mushure. This committee was later reconstituted on August 4, 2026, with Justice Bharat Patel replacing Justice Mushure, though the terms of reference remained unchanged.

The investigation's mandate was narrowly defined to ascertain whether Justice Chiweshe maintained private contact or engaged in financial or business dealings with Kereke or his associates while the appeal was pending. Specific areas of inquiry included a motor vehicle transaction, requests for or receipt of money, the provision of company documents, and discussions concerning a gold-mining interest. However, Justice Chiweshe has challenged these proceedings by filing an urgent High Court application on September 4, 2026, seeking to halt the disciplinary hearing scheduled for September 9, 2026. He argues that the investigating committee has expanded the scope of the case beyond what Chief Justice Gwaunza originally referred for investigation. Concurrently, he filed a separate application for review, requesting the court to preserve the status quo and stay the entire disciplinary process pending the review's determination. The JSC is cited as the first respondent, with Justice Anne Mary Gowora, in her capacity as chair of the disciplinary committee, named as the second respondent.

Munyaradzi Kereke’s underlying complaint, a 10-page “formal report” dated June 18, 2026, was addressed jointly to President Emmerson Mnangagwa and the Chief Justice. This report, captioned as one of “gross misconduct and criminal abuse of duty,” presents the allegations in more graphic detail than the JSC’s subsequent notice. Notably, Kereke’s report also leveled accusations against two other appeal judges, Samuel Kudya and Tendai Uchena, who sat with Justice Chiweshe on his criminal appeal. However, only Justice Chiweshe was referred by the Chief Justice for disciplinary investigation, with the fate of the allegations against Justices Kudya and Uchena not disclosed in the court papers.

Kereke explained that he delayed filing this report until after his release from prison due to “strategic necessity,” aiming to ensure his safety while incarcerated. He further alleges that while his appeal was still pending, Justice Chiweshe directly told him that he and his colleagues, Justices Uchena and Kudya, had reviewed his appeal and agreed his conviction was wrongful, but then asked, “what are you going to do for us so we take you off the hook?” Kereke claims he initially refused this proposition, though the source material cuts off before detailing further events from 2022.

This Justice Chiweshe misconduct hearing stemming from the Kereke complaint underscores the Judicial Service Commission's commitment to actively enforcing ethical conduct among judicial officers. The proceedings highlight the critical role of the Judicial Service (Code of Ethics) Regulations, 2012, in maintaining the integrity of the judiciary. The specific nature of the allegations, involving a sitting Supreme Court judge and a convicted individual whose appeal he heard, draws significant attention to the standards expected of the bench.

The outcome of these disciplinary proceedings and Justice Chiweshe's urgent High Court application will be closely watched. It is expected to set important precedents regarding the scope of judicial misconduct investigations and clarify the procedural rights afforded to judges facing such inquiries. The case serves as a crucial test of the mechanisms in place to ensure accountability and public trust in the judicial system.

This case underscores the Judicial Service Commission's active enforcement of ethical conduct under the Judicial Service (Code of Ethics) Regulations, 2012. Lawyers should monitor the outcome for precedents regarding the scope of judicial misconduct investigations and the procedural rights of judges facing such inquiries.

Source: Original reporting via ZimLive