The State v Stephen Zakey

The appellant was convicted by a Regional Magistrate in Harare of rape. On 23 January 2008 at No. 24 Coronation Avenue, Greendale, Harare, the appellant had sexual intercourse with the complainant. The complainant knew the appellant as a prophet or healer who had been assisting her with an ailment that caused her to lose consciousness and fall down. Her sister, who worked at the same premises as the appellant, had referred her to him. On the day in question, the appellant called the complainant to his house to collect "holy water". When she arrived, he told her the Holy Spirit had instructed him to take her as a wife and insisted on having sexual intercourse with her. The complainant refused as he was married and she had only sought his help for her illness. The appellant overpowered her, felled her to the floor, removed her clothing and raped her while gagging her to prevent screaming. Afterwards, he threatened her not to tell anyone or she would die or her illness would worsen. The complainant became pregnant from the rape and gave birth to a child. The report was made not immediately by the complainant but later by her sister. The appellant did not deny having intercourse but claimed it was consensual.

• Whether the conviction could be sustained on the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant
• Whether the absence of evidence of screams or soiled garments precluded a conviction for rape
• Whether the delay in reporting and the fact that the report was made by the complainant's sister rather than the complainant herself affected the credibility of the complainant's testimony
• Whether the evidence supported a finding of lack of consent in the context of a healer-patient relationship
• Whether the trial magistrate erred in accepting the State witnesses' evidence over the defence witnesses' evidence

The appeal against conviction was dismissed. The appeal against sentence was withdrawn by the appellant's legal practitioners during the hearing.

There is no legal requirement for corroboration through evidence of screams or soiled garments to sustain a conviction for rape. In assessing consent and credibility in sexual offence cases, courts must consider the specific context of the relationship between the parties, including power imbalances such as those inherent in healer-patient relationships. A complainant's genuine belief in the accused's power to harm them provides a cogent explanation for delayed reporting and does not necessarily undermine credibility. The trial court's assessment of witness credibility and demeanour should only be interfered with by an appeal court in clearly stipulated circumstances where error is demonstrated. Even if a love relationship existed between parties (which must be proven), this does not in itself constitute evidence of consensual intercourse.

The Court made observations about the importance of courts not taking an "arm chair approach" in determining matters before them, emphasizing the need to understand the specific cultural and belief contexts in which events occur. The Court noted that educational level does not preclude belief in spiritual or prophetic powers, and that such beliefs can be genuinely held across different levels of education. The Court observed that the complainant's entire family, including her parents, appeared to share beliefs in the appellant's prophetic powers, which contextualizes the complainant's fear and explains the family's initial reluctance to confront the appellant or report to authorities.

This case is significant in South African jurisprudence (though it is a Zimbabwean case) for its treatment of consent in sexual offence cases involving power imbalances, particularly in healer-patient relationships. It establishes that courts must consider the specific context and belief systems of complainants when assessing credibility and consent. The judgment reinforces that there is no legal requirement for corroboration through physical evidence such as screams or soiled garments in rape cases. It also provides important guidance on assessing delayed reporting in circumstances where the complainant had reasonable grounds to fear the accused, particularly in relationships involving spiritual or healing power dynamics.