JUSTICE IN ZIMBABWE 117 ____________________________________________________________________ Following the arrest of Mr Moyo and Mr Mapombere on Monday over allegations of subverting a constitutional Government, the sources said that there was a flurry of activity in the British High Commission yesterday with meetings between MDC lawyers and senior members, and high commission officials. … “Investigators are looking at a huge paper trail pointing to heavy involvement by the British High Commission,” the sources said. On 14 June 2002 it published this article: “Law Society Working To Further British Interests When Professor Jonathan Moyo castigated the Law Society for its defence of white judges, dilution of Zimbabwe's sovereignty and conjured notions of judicial independence, he was being prophetic. The Law Society, true to form, has now shown that instead of focusing on the defence of the marginalised citizens, its brief now appears to be concentrating on holding meetings with High Commissioners of diplomatic missions to map out strategies against the sovereignty and hard-won independence of the country. At no time did we hear the Law Society criticise judicial decisions that went against blacks. Instead, we have a litany of statements questioning why blacks are being elevated to the bench. After 22 years of independence, a black man still believes that only white people should hold sway in the judiciary and that only they can pass judgment with impartiality. Is this an inferiority complex on their part? Professor Moyo was once quoted saying ‘Media reports attributed to the ever partisan president of the Law Society of Zimbabwe, Mr Sternford Moyo, allegedly calling for the constitutional reforms to prevent the packing of the Supreme Court with pro-Government judges’ is clear proof that the LSZ under Moyo has become an anti-Government, antiblack and British-sponsored organisation. ‘The LSZ’s position is that the bench should be packed with anti-Government judges who are presumably white and steeped in Rhodesian jurisprudence like the departed Anthony Gubbay and his fellow judges.’ Those words should have rung a warning bell and served as a harbinger of the ominous revelation of the lawyers’ agenda, that of working to further white and British interests. Allegations that two members of the Law Society wrote to the British High Commission are disturbing, to say the least, in that patriotism does not exist in their