The State v Hardlife Nhokwara

On 22 May 2016 at around 1100 hours at Hove village in Zvishavane, the accused, then 21 years old, fatally assaulted his biological mother, Juliet Nhokwara, at her homestead. The deceased had been collecting firewood next to her homestead when the accused suddenly picked up a pestle, walked up to her and struck her several times on the head. The accused then fled the scene, leaving his mother bleeding profusely and screaming for help. She later died from her injuries. A post-mortem examination by Dr J Betancourt established the cause of death as severe cerebral oedema, universal subarachnoid haemorrhage and skull fracture due to beating.

• Whether the accused was mentally disordered at the time of committing the act so as not to be held legally responsible for his actions
• Whether the requirements for a special verdict under section 29(2) of the Mental Health Act were satisfied

1. The accused was found not guilty by reason of insanity. 2. The accused was to be returned to prison for transfer to a special mental institution for treatment.

Where a court is satisfied from the evidence presented at trial that an accused person perpetrated the act constituting the offence charged, but that at the time of commission, the accused was mentally disordered to such an extent that they should not be held legally responsible for their actions, the court must return a special verdict in terms of section 29(2) of the Mental Health Act [Chapter 15:12]. Expert psychiatric evidence establishing that the accused suffered from schizophrenia and substance use disorder, which rendered them mentally disturbed and incapable of legal responsibility, is sufficient to ground such a verdict.

The judgment contains limited obiter dicta. The court's acceptance of the agreed facts and the psychiatric evidence was relatively straightforward, with both counsel urging the return of a special verdict. The court did not make extensive observations beyond what was necessary to determine the legal responsibility of the accused.

This case demonstrates the application of the insanity defence under Zimbabwean criminal law and the application of section 29(2) of the Mental Health Act [Chapter 15:12]. It illustrates the proper procedure for returning a special verdict where psychiatric evidence establishes that an accused person was suffering from a mental disorder (schizophrenia and substance use disorder) at the time of committing the offence, rendering them not legally responsible for their actions despite having committed the actus reus of murder.