Bushiri secures victory against extradition: Malawi High Court declares extradition ruling unlawful and unconstitutional

The High Court of Malawi has delivered a decisive victory for Prophet Shepherd Huxley Bushiri and his wife, Mary Bushiri, after setting aside a lower court’s order that would have extradited the couple to South Africa.

In a landmark ruling delivered in Lilongwe, Honourable Justice Mzonde Mvula found that the extradition proceedings against the Bushiris were unlawful, procedurally flawed, and violated Malawi’s constitutional guarantees of fairness, equality, and the right to life.

The ruling effectively halts South Africa’s long-standing effort to have the couple returned to face charges of fraud, forgery, and rape — allegations which the Bushiris have consistently denied.

Justice Mvula’s judgment followed a detailed review of the 12 March 2025 decision by the Chief Resident Magistrate’s Court, which had ordered the couple’s committal to prison pending surrender to South Africa.

But according to the High Court, the proceedings before the magistrate were fundamentally flawed.

“The applicants were denied the right to be heard, in breach of the principle of audi alteram partem,” Justice Mvula said in his ruling. “The Magistrate delivered a ruling after hearing only the case of the respondent. Even in extradition proceedings, where hearing is opted, both sides ought to be heard.”

The Court found that no charge was read to the Bushiris, no explanation of their rights was given, and they were effectively condemned without being allowed to speak.

Legal analysts described this finding as a stern reminder that “due process cannot be sacrificed, even in politically charged international cases.”

The Court also took issue with the evidence used to support South Africa’s extradition request, describing it as unreliable and improperly authenticated.

Justice Mvula noted that the documents presented to South African Justice Schyff for authentication were merely scanned copies that differed materially from the originals.

“The law requires authentication by a judge or official of the requesting state,” the Judge said. “This never happened in the extradition request of the present applicants.”

Equally troubling, the High Court found that the main South African witness, Advocate Mzinyathi, relied entirely on hearsay — statements made by investigators and complainants whom he had never directly interviewed.

“This is a dangerous trajectory, to say the least, clutching at straws,” Justice Mvula observed, warning that extradition decisions must rest on “admissible and reliable evidence, not summaries of allegations.”

In a further blow to the prosecution’s case, the High Court found that some of the charges against the Bushiris had been “invented” at the lower court level.

Mary Bushiri, the Judge noted, was committed on a charge of “immigration-related forgery” that did not appear in the original extradition docket.