Two courts, one verdict, and a man who would not leave
by BERNARD CHIKETO
THE LEGAL journey of Wilson Masokovere has reached its terminus—not with a bang, but with the quiet thud of a gavel.
On June 18, the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe dismissed his appeal for failure to pay security costs. A fortnight earlier, on June 30, the High Court had thrown out his rescission application with costs.
Two courts, two defeats. For the former Manicaland projects coordinator of Destiny of Afrika Network (Danet), the writing is no longer on the wall; it has been carved into granite.
Masokovere, once a trusted lieutenant of Reverend Dr Obediah Musindo, Danet’s founder and president, has spent more than three years contesting his dismissal.
The relationship, once close enough to co-found a security company together, curdled spectacularly.
The alleged cause? Masokovere’s refusal to facilitate an audit of Danet’s housing projects in Manicaland amid allegations of fraud and misappropriation of funds.
The dispute involves over 1,000 people in Mutare who reportedly paid more than US$3,000 each for residential stands, with allocations allegedly unrecorded in the organisation’s books.
The first legal blow landed on February 11, 2026, when Justice Jacob Manzunzu granted a final interdict against Masokovere, barring him from entering or approaching Danet’s Mutare business premises.
The court ordered him to pay costs on the legal practitioner-client scale—a punitive measure reserved for parties who have acted improperly.
Undeterred, Masokovere filed an urgent chamber application to halt enforcement. It was struck off the roll for want of urgency. He then sought rescission of the default judgment. That too failed.
Justice Mambara, presiding over the rescission application, was unsparing.
The explanation for Masokovere’s default—that he believed settlement negotiations would spare him the trouble of opposing—collapsed under chronological scrutiny.
The applicant had already fallen into default before negotiations even began. Events occurring after default, the judge observed, do not explain the default itself.
Nor did the applicant’s novel argument—that he was not an employee but a trustee, rendering any disciplinary process a nullity—impress the court. The dismissal decision remained extant and had not been set aside.
His trusteeship, the judge noted, had lapsed; the notarial deed of trust executed in 2017 provided for a maximum four-year term, and no renewal had been produced.
The court was equally unimpressed by accusations of fraud levelled against the respondents. “The documentary record does not sustain them,” Justice Mambara wrote.
The Supreme Court, meanwhile, did not even reach the merits. Rule 61(5) of the Supreme Court Rules (2025) requires the payment of security costs. Masokovere did not comply. The appeal was deemed abandoned and dismissed.
It was, in procedural terms, an own goal of the highest order.
Yet the legal defeats may be the least of his worries. A third judgment—on contempt of court—is still awaited. Reverend Dr Musindo has accused Masokovere of resisting enforcement efforts with “mafia tactics” and violence, allegations the former coordinator denies, insisting instead that he merely wants a “proper handover process”.
The court, however, has already made its position clear. In the rescission judgment, Justice Mambara noted that Masokovere had been cited in contempt proceedings under case HCH 834/26. “Candour is indispensable when a litigant seeks discretionary relief,” the judge observed.
Masokovere has not been charged with any crime, and he is entitled to his day in court. But the pattern is unmistakable: a man who refuses to leave, who contests every ruling, who finds procedural objections where others see finality.
The courts have now spoken twice, and a third reckoning looms.
For Danet, the legal victory clears the way for an audit of projects that have allegedly gone unscrutinised for years. For the 9,000 members in Manicaland, it promises accountability.
For Masokovere, it marks the end of a long and costly campaign. The High Court has barred him from the premises. The Supreme Court has closed the door on appeal. The Sheriff may now enforce the order.
And a contempt judgment, if it comes, could add ignominy to defeat.
In the end, the law has a way of outlasting the litigant. Masokovere fought hard, but the courts have ruled—twice. The third judgment, when it arrives, may not be any kinder.
Do you have a story to share? Email bchiketo@gmail.com