THE peace deal between First Farai and Gift Amuli is quite an interesting one. It’s not just because of the personalities involved but because of the legal cloud hanging over the entire arrangement. While reconciliation is often applauded in community and religious circles, this particular truce raises serious questions about whether it aligns with the rule of law — especially considering concerns that it may violate Amuli’s bail conditions.
Zimbabwe has long valued dialogue over confrontation, and public disputes — particularly those involving influential figures — can easily spiral into unnecessary tension. If First Farai and Gift Amuli have genuinely decided to bury the hatchet, that in itself is commendable. Conflict resolution is healthier than endless public mudslinging.
However, the timing and circumstances of this reconciliation cannot be ignored. Gift Amuli is out on bail, which means he is subject to strict legal conditions set by the courts. Those conditions often include restrictions on contact with complainants, witnesses, or co-accused persons, and sometimes even public conduct.
[paywall]
The peace deal involved the direct engagement that was prohibited under those conditions and that is why the issue has shifted from reconciliation to potential contempt of court. They are designed to protect the integrity of ongoing investigations and ensure that justice is neither obstructed nor manipulated. If individuals on bail are seen to be negotiating public peace deals in ways that contradict court directives, it risks sending a dangerous message — that legal processes can be bypassed through private arrangements.
This is where public concern becomes valid. If ordinary citizens are expected to strictly adhere to bail conditions, then public figures like Amuli must be held to the same standard — if not a higher one. Justice must not only be done; it must be seen to be done.
[/paywall]
All Zim News – Bringing you the latest news and updates.
