JUSTICE IN ZIMBABWE 42 ____________________________________________________________________ Justice Blackie when Mr Chinamasa failed to appear in court to answer the charge of contempt of court. However, the judge granted leave to the Registrar of the High Court, in consultation with Mr Chinamasa or his legal practitioners, to set down the contempt of court matter for hearing on the merits.65 At the date of writing this report, Mr Justice Hungwe’s judgment has not been published. When it is, it will be interesting to see how he justifies setting aside a final judgment of another High Court judge. Comment As stated above, in his reaction to the judgment against him, Mr Chinamasa said that he would consult with the Chief Justice and recommend the setting up of a disciplinary enquiry to investigate Judge Blackie’s conduct. Mr Chinamasa seems to be unaware of the provisions of the Constitution in this regard. In terms of s 87 in the Constitution it is the Chief Justice who is entitled to initiate investigations into the conduct of a judge of the High Court. The Minister should not normally try to influence the Chief Justice in the exercise of his power under that section, and certainly should never do so in a matter in which he himself has a personal interest. Mr Chinamasa asserted that only the Attorney-General had the power to prosecute criminal cases and, by implication, contended that only the Attorney-General could prosecute cases of contempt of court. This is not correct. Both the High Court and the Supreme Court in the judgments cited above found that the court had power to bring prosecutions in respect of contempt of court. It will be remembered that the Attorney-General was quoted as saying that the case against Mr Chinamasa was a civil rather than a criminal matter and that a default judgment should have been issued instead of a warrant of arrest. With respect, he was incorrect (and inconsistent66) in suggesting this. The proceedings were clearly criminal, and a default judgment cannot be issued in a case of contempt of court. As for the comment by the Secretary for Justice that the proceedings should be set aside as irregular, Mr Mangota must surely have known that the only body that can set aside a wrong judgment by the High Court is a higher court, namely the Supreme