Judiciary Needs Adequate Funding

The statement this week by the Judge President Makarau comes as no major surprise considering the Zimbabwean Judiciary as an institution has been on a downward spiral for a relatively long time.
It suffices to say that sufficient funding is a cornerstone of the independence of the judiciary, as set out in the UN Basic Principles adopted by the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held at Milan from 26 August to 6 September 1985 and endorsed by UN General Assembly Resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985.
It then follows that the administration of justice should be inspired by these fundamental principles concerning the exercise of judicial office aimed at enabling judges to act in accordance with those principles.
Judges are charged with the ultimate decision over life, freedoms, rights, duties and property of citizens. Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines in particular the principles of equality before the law, the presumption of innocence and of the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial judiciary, the lack of adequate funding of the judiciary has compromised the all these norms of law in Zimbabwe.
To me it is not so much what the Judge President said, but more what she did not say. The lack of funding in the Zimbabwean Judicial system is a symptom of a far bigger problem than we care to explore. It does not take a rocket scientist to deduce why there was an exodus of the Judges that once graced our benches into neighbouring countries, notably Namibia and Botswana.
We need to revisit the ideals that we inherited at independence no matter how skewed they were. It is the ideals that we seek not the personalities that graced it. Political interference in the institution of the Judiciary has manifested itself in all kinds of problems, ranging from accused persons been kept in remand prisons for far longer than is the norm, retrospective legislation in the land hearings etc.
The institution of the Judiciary in Zimbabwe for all intents and purposes has been rendered subservient to the exceedingly powerful executive. The principle of the separation of powers has been reduced to a mere concept.
Do we need to remind ourselves that the Law society of Zimbabwe has been screaming blue murder for a relatively long time over these issues? One wonders what happens to all the funds that are generated by the same judicial system by way of fines, bail posted by those that have absconded etc.
The legal fraternity is now the playground of powerful politicians, who impose their wayward ways without challenge. The outburst by the Judge President has presented us with an opportunity to re-look at the way the Judiciary is run. We need to instil confidence in our legal system in order to attain a higher level of transparency.
Lloyd Msipa is a Lawyer and writes from London in the United Kingdom