Judgment No. CCZ 13/2015 11 Const. Application No. CCZ 56/13 proceedings and the trial judge’s notes went missing, it is however apparent that the disappearance of the record largely contributed to the delay. WHETHER THE APPLICANT ASSERTED HIS RIGHTS [27] There is evidence that the applicant complained to at least three High Court judges about the delay after the year 2008. The first complaint was made to a judge during a prison visit. The other two were made during bail applications in the High Court. All were of the opinion that, since this was a matter where all the evidence had been heard by HUNGWE J, the issue of the delay was better dealt with by the trial judge. The referral of the complaint by these judges to HUNGWE J did not produce any results. Thereafter it was discovered that the transcript of the record of the proceedings as well as the judge’s notes had both mysteriously gone missing. [28] The applicant had been represented by pro deo counsel during the trial proceedings. It is common cause that his counsel thereafter left the country to work in Botswana but left the file at the offices of the law firm. The file was then re-allocated to a legal assistant in the law firm. What happened to it thereafter is unknown. [29] Whilst I accept, as a general proposition, that a person who seeks a permanent stay of the criminal proceedings in which he is an accused, must assert his rights and that failure to do so will make it difficult for him to prove that he was denied a speedy trial, I am not convinced in this case that the applicant was in a position to do more than complain to the High Court judges. His lawyer, representing him pro deo, never demanded that this matter be determined. After the legal practitioner left the country, no other legal practitioner from the firm pursued the matter. It is moot