Home » Featured » Court humiliates AFM pastor

Court humiliates AFM pastor

A bid by an Apostolic Faith Mission (AFM) pastor to compel the church to cause an external audit of the church’s books of accounts recently hit a brick wall after High Court judge Justice Happius Zhou dismissed the clergy man’s application with costs.

In his judgement, Justice Zhou said a church is a private organisation not a public institution and a member can choose to join or leave.

On June 27, 2018 Justice Zhou delivered the judgement following an application by AFM pastor, Kefias Mujokeri and one Paymore Murefu who had petitioned the court seeking an interdict to compel the church to cause an external audit of books of accounts for the period 2004 to 2015.

Whether the applicants (Mujokeri and Murefu) have a clear right is a matter of substantive law; whether that right is clearly established is a question of evidence. The right which is sought to be protected through the interdict must thus be a legal right,” Justice Zhou said.

“Neither membership nor employment gives the applicants a legal right to the finances or other assets of the first respondent (AFM). The respondent as a church is a private organisation which a member can choose to join or leave.

“Members do not invest money in a church which would give them a right to its assets because the first respondent both in terms of its Constitution and by the common law has a juristic personality which is distinct from that of its members. Assets of the first respondent do not belong to its members.”

“The applicants may have a moral interest to ensure that the affairs of the first respondent are conducted in a transparent manner in accordance with the constitution and other laws of the first respondent. But those interests cannot be elevated to the status of legal rights which could be protected by an interdict,” the judge said.

“Equally, the position of employee does not give the first applicant (Mujokeri) a right to the first respondent’s (AFM) assets. The obligation of the employer to an employee is to pay the agreed remuneration. An employee acquires no proprietary right in the assets of his employer by virtue of being an employee which would entitle him to seek an interdict in connection with the assets of the employer.”

Justice Zhou also said Harare lawyer Charles Warara, who represented the pastors “repeatedly made the submissions that the first respondent (AFM) is a public institution. That is incorrect”.

While its Constitution gives it legal personality with the capacity to sue or be sued in its own name, the first respondent (AFM) does not by that fact become a public institution.” he said.

In the application Mujokeri and Murefu had cited AFM, its president Asper Madziyire, Munyaradzi Shumba and Amon Madawo as respondents.



About Simbarashe Nyanhanga

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Check Also

Like Father Like Son: Youths Rally Behind The Late Matiza’s Son

It appears the son of the late transport minister Biggie Matiza, Batsirai has chosen to ...