HARARE – Law professor Lovemore Madhuku has rejected Chief Justice Luke Malaba’s claim that staff shortages are crippling Zimbabwe’s justice system, arguing instead that deep-seated procedural inefficiencies, not a lack of judges or magistrates, are the real cause of delays in the courts. Madhuku said while the judiciary has made measurable progress in delivering judgments, particularly through electronic platforms, the narrative that Zimbabwe suffers from an acute shortage of judicial officers is misplaced. “For a population of about 16 million, the number of judges is actually quite significant,” Madhuku said.
“I do not agree that we have too few judges. What we have not fundamentally changed are the court procedures, which are inherently slow.” His remarks place him at odds with Malaba, who on Monday warned that an “untenable situation” had emerged due to shortages of judges, magistrates and support staff, saying the judiciary’s constitutional mandate was under threat unless staffing levels were “dramatically increased”. Speaking after the official opening of the 2026 legal year, Madhuku acknowledged improvements in the timeliness of judgments.
“In the past, you could wait for a year or even two years before a judgment was delivered. Although there are still a few instances like that, there is now greater realisation within the system that judgments must be delivered timeously,” he said. However, he cautioned against assuming that technology or staffing alone could cure systemic delays, pointing to persistent problems with the Integrated Electronic Case Management System (IECMS).
[paywall]
“The IECMS is still problematic because many people face serious network challenges. More importantly, during virtual hearings, there are frequent interruptions. It is common to have two or three disconnections in a single session,” Madhuku said.
He said such disruptions often push litigants and lawyers to prefer physical hearings despite the convenience of digital platforms. “Everyone gets frustrated. You end up asking parties where they are and how far they are from court.
While the system is a good step and should be maintained, it still needs serious improvement,” he said. Madhuku also stressed that physical court hearings remain critical to public confidence in the justice system. “There is something important about the public seeing justice being done in a physical courtroom.
That element still matters,” he said. But his sharpest criticism was reserved for court procedures, which he said waste judicial time and slow down case resolution regardless of how many judges are appointed. “In the High Court, for example, a lawyer may be allowed to speak for an hour, when what they are saying could be said in 15 minutes. Then the opposing lawyer speaks for another hour,” Madhuku said.
[/paywall]
