The State v Newton Hove

On 8 January 2020, at Village Madhiye, Chief Mazvihwa, Zvishavane, Midlands Province, the accused (aged 30 years) asked his sister, Blessed Hove (deceased 1, aged 30 years), for his National Social Security Authority (NSSA) documents so he could access his funds. Deceased 1 refused to give him the documents because the accused was a psychiatric patient. The accused responded by striking deceased 1 with an adze and stabbing her with a knife multiple times on the face, neck, hip, leg, hands, stomach and back, causing her death. After killing deceased 1, the accused proceeded to kill her 5-year-old son, Tanaka Kufa (deceased 2, the accused's nephew), by striking him with an adze and stabbing him multiple times on the chest, stomach, neck, abdomen and face, causing his death. Post-mortem examinations revealed both deaths were caused by acute anaemia and organ lacerations resulting from stab wounds. The accused was examined by psychiatrist Dr N Mawere at Mlondolozi Special Institution, who concluded that at the time of the offence, the accused was suffering from schizophrenia and substance-induced psychosis, was mentally disordered to such an extent that he could not be held responsible for his actions, and did not appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct.

• Whether the accused committed the acts that caused the deaths of the two deceased persons
• Whether the accused was suffering from a mental disorder at the time of the commission of the offences
• Whether the accused's mental disorder was of such a nature that he could not be held criminally responsible for his actions
• Whether a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity should be entered in terms of section 29(2) of the Mental Health Act Chapter 15:12

1. The accused is found not guilty and acquitted by reason of insanity. 2. The accused is hereby returned to prison pending transfer to Mlondolozi Special Institution for further examination and treatment in terms of section 29(2)(a) of the Mental Health Act (Chapter 15:23).

Where an accused person committed acts constituting murder but at the time of commission was suffering from a mental disorder (schizophrenia and substance-induced psychosis) of such severity that he did not appreciate the wrongfulness of his actions and could not be held responsible for those actions, the court must return a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity in terms of section 29(2) of the Mental Health Act Chapter 15:23. Criminal responsibility requires that the accused have the mental capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of their conduct at the time of the offence. Mental disorder that negates this capacity precludes criminal liability, regardless of the gravity of the offence.

The court noted that although the accused was found not guilty by reason of insanity, he is now fit to stand trial (as per the psychiatric report). The court's order requiring the accused to be returned to prison pending transfer to Mlondolozi Special Institution for further examination and treatment reflects the balance between public safety concerns and the need for appropriate medical treatment for mentally disordered offenders. The case involved particularly tragic circumstances where the accused killed his own sister and nephew, highlighting the devastating impact that untreated mental illness can have on families and communities.

This case demonstrates the application of the Mental Health Act Chapter 15:23 in Zimbabwean criminal law, specifically the test for determining criminal responsibility where an accused person suffers from mental disorder at the time of committing an offence. The case illustrates the importance of psychiatric evidence in establishing whether an accused person appreciated the wrongfulness of their conduct. It confirms that where mental disorder negates criminal responsibility, a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity must be entered, even in serious cases involving multiple murders. The judgment reinforces the principle that criminal liability requires both the commission of the actus reus and the presence of mens rea, and that mental disorder can negate the latter. It also highlights the procedural consequences of such a verdict, namely commitment to a special institution for treatment rather than punishment.