The State v Nyasha Mandanda

The accused, Nyasha Mandanda, was charged with the murder of his wife, Natsiwe Moyo (aged 23), on 23 March 2017 at Vanguard Mining Compound in Mberengwa. The deceased was disabled, having suffered a childhood head injury that left her with a paralyzed right hand, a limp, and a speech impediment. The marriage was characterized by systematic domestic violence, with the accused regularly assaulting the deceased when intoxicated, causing her to repeatedly leave and return to her parents. On the fatal night, following an argument over food preparation (the accused wanted meat instead of milk), the accused stabbed the deceased with a kitchen knife above the collarbone. The knife penetrated through the right clavicle and first rib, puncturing the lung and thoracic cavity. The deceased was pronounced dead on arrival at Mberengwa Hospital. The accused initially fled the scene but reappeared when the deceased was being transported to hospital.

• Whether the accused acted in self-defence as provided under section 253 of the Criminal Law Code
• Whether the stabbing was accidental
• Whether the accused had the requisite intention for murder (direct or constructive intent)
• Whether the accused satisfied the requirements for the defence of person

The accused was found guilty of murder with constructive intent and sentenced to 17 years imprisonment.

For the defence of person under section 253 of the Criminal Law Code to succeed, all statutory requirements must be satisfied: (1) an unlawful attack must have commenced or been imminent; (2) the defensive conduct must have been necessary to avert the attack with no other means of escape; (3) the means used must be reasonable in all circumstances; and (4) any harm caused must be to the attacker and not grossly disproportionate to the threatened harm. Where an accused has disarmed an attacker and the victim is unarmed and disabled, no unlawful attack is occurring or imminent, and the use of a deadly weapon is neither necessary nor reasonable. Constructive intent for murder is established where the accused realizes the real risk or possibility of death resulting from their actions but continues notwithstanding. A deep penetrating stab wound causing fatal internal injuries is inconsistent with an accidental stabbing.

The court made strong observations about gender-based violence and domestic violence in society, stating: "This court has repeatedly counseled men still stuck in a time-capsule of the rudimentary feudalists who still believe that women are objects of appropriation to be treated with disdain before being killed...that their time is up. We live in a society where women enjoy full legal rights and should be respected." The court emphasized that "women should be protected by our courts at all times" and that "these courts will not stand akimbo as women are subjected to this kind of treatment at a whim." The court also commented on the importance of discounting pre-trial detention periods from sentences to encourage the state to bring accused persons to trial within a reasonable time.

This case is significant in South African and Zimbabwean jurisprudence as it demonstrates the courts' strong stance against gender-based violence and domestic violence. The judgment reinforces that claims of self-defence will be critically scrutinized in domestic violence contexts, particularly where there is a pattern of abuse and the victim is vulnerable or disabled. The court's emphasis on protecting women's rights and rejecting outdated patriarchal attitudes reflects the modern constitutional approach to gender equality. The case also illustrates the application of section 253 of the Criminal Law Code regarding the defence of person, clarifying that all requirements must be strictly satisfied, including that the attack must be occurring or imminent, the response necessary, the means reasonable, and the harm not grossly disproportionate.