THE trial of Alpha Media Holdings senior journalist Blessed Mhlanga (pictured) and HStv general manager Olga Muteiwa has been postponed to next year after the State completed evidence from its first witness, Edmore Nyadzamba.
Mhlanga and Muteiwa are charged with transmitting messages likely to incite public violence.
The matter was heard on Wednesday before Harare magistrate Sheunesu Matova. They are represented by lawyers Chris Mhike, Douglas Coltart and Beatrice Mtetwa.
The State has repeatedly sought postponements since the case began, delaying progress.
Nyadzamba, the officer-in-charge of CID Law and Order in Harare, told the court that Mhlanga allegedly “engaged Blessed Geza and provided facilities for him to record utterances” that were said to encourage citizens to revolt against the government, adding that the accused transmitted Geza’s messages through digital platforms.
Mhike challenged the charges, arguing that Mhlanga had no control over HStv’s broadcasting decisions as he is neither a director nor shareholder.
Keep Reading
- Letter to my people: The experiment has failed spectacularly
- Village Rhapsody: Zimbabwean journalists under siege
- AMH journalists arrested
- Letter to my people: The experiment has failed spectacularly
He said the State was victimising a journalist performing his constitutional duties, noting that the video at the centre of the case does not implicate Mhlanga.
The defence also highlighted inconsistencies between Nyadzamba’s oral testimony and his warned-and-cautioned statement, urging the court to stop the witness from “searching for answers from a script”.
Under cross-examination, Nyadzamba claimed Mhlanga had personally said: “President Mnangagwa must resign with immediate effect and if he does not resign the masses will force him violently”.
He said he interviewed Mhlanga and obtained his address but admitted police failed to execute a search warrant for unknown reasons — a lapse Mhike described as evidence of a malicious and improperly handled investigation.
The defence further argued that nowhere in the State papers does Mhlanga admit to interviewing Geza.
When presented with a police notice appealing to the public to help locate the accused, Nyadzamba initially refused to read it, citing poor eyesight and having forgotten his spectacles.
He also conceded he did not know where the alleged offence was committed, an admission the defence said no competent investigating officer should make.
When the trial resumed the following day, the defence said Nyadzamba had failed to interpret a cyber-forensics report central to the case, with the witness insisting he could not comment because he was not an expert and feared misleading the court.
The defence also noted that references to content posted on X (formerly Twitter), cited by police when arresting Mhlanga, do not appear anywhere in the State’s documents.
Nyadzamba maintained that HStv had “participated in broadcasting, publishing and transmitting data likely to cause violence”.
Mtetwa countered that neither the search warrant nor State papers allege any unlawful conduct by HSTV, saying the company was never informed of the basis for the charges, a violation of the accused’s rights.
Prosecutor Anesu Chirenje objected to questions requiring Nyadzamba to interpret constitutional law, arguing he was not a legal expert, but the defence said an officer-in-charge of Law and Order should understand basic arrest procedures.
Mtetwa also highlighted discrepancies between Nyadzamba’s testimony and the State outline. While the State alleges incitement against the President, Nyadzamba testified about incitement against the government.
He said there was no contradiction because “the President is the head of government and commander-in-chief”.
Mtetwa replied that he sounded as though he came “from the Herbert Chitepo School of Ideology” for conflating the President’s authority with that of other arms of the state.
In its closing arguments, the defence said Section 60 of the Constitution protects freedom of expression and the media, adding that journalists are obliged to report on matters of national importance.
Nyadzamba acknowledged the right to disseminate information but said it was not absolute, arguing that circulating content likely to trigger violence is unlawful.
Mtetwa maintained the broadcast contained no violent content and no viewers interpreted it as a call for the violent removal of the President.
She argued that Geza’s press conference was constitutional and accused police of deliberately omitting parts of the Constitution from transcripts to misrepresent his statements.
Mtetwa also questioned why HStvk was charged six months after the broadcast.
Nyadzamba said investigations can take time. The defence suggested HStv was added as a “dragnet” because police lacked a solid case against Mhlanga alone.
Magistrate Matova postponed the trial to January 12 and 13, 2026, for continuation.