The State v Wonderful Makarichi

On 1 August 2017, at Zisani Village, Chief Makoni, Rusape, Zimbabwe, the accused Wonderful Makarichi struck the deceased Phillip Makarichi (his brother) on the head with a stone weighing 5.17 kg. The deceased sustained severe injuries which caused his death. Following his arrest for murder, the accused was examined by Dr Patience Mavunganidze, a psychiatrist, who concluded that at the time of the commission of the offence, the accused was mentally disordered and could not formulate the requisite mens rea to commit murder. The accused admitted what happened but stated it occurred when he was mentally challenged. The community where the offence was committed, including the village head and the accused's brother Bornface Makarichi and his wife Lucia Changa, indicated they were not ready to accept and accommodate the accused.

• Whether the accused had the requisite mental capacity to form the mens rea for murder at the time of the offence
• Whether a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity should be returned under section 29 of the Mental Health Act
• Whether the accused should be institutionalized for treatment and management

1. The accused is found not guilty by reason of insanity. 2. The accused is to be returned to prison for transfer to Chikurubi Psychiatric Unit or such other appropriate institution for treatment and management until discharge therefrom by a competent body.

Where an accused person is found to have been mentally disordered at the time of committing an offense and could not formulate the requisite mens rea for the crime charged, the court must return a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity under section 29 of the Mental Health Act. When such a verdict is returned, and the community is not ready to accommodate the accused and the accused requires treatment and rehabilitation, the court must order institutionalization of the accused in an appropriate psychiatric facility for treatment and management until discharge by a competent body or Health Review Tribunal as provided by legislation.

The court observed that institutionalization of the accused was "imperative and protective measures be put in place to guarantee his safety and recovery" and that it would be "improper to prematurely release him." The court noted that "the accused will be released at the ripe time by a competent body or Health Review Tribunal as provided for by the legislation," indicating deference to specialized tribunals for determining when mentally disordered offenders are ready for release. The court also emphasized the importance of consulting with the community, including the village head and family members, regarding the readiness to accommodate a mentally disordered offender.

This case demonstrates the application of section 29 of the Mental Health Act [Chapter 15:12] in Zimbabwean criminal proceedings where an accused person lacks mental capacity to form mens rea. It illustrates the court's approach to balancing the interests of justice with the need for psychiatric treatment and community safety in cases involving mentally disordered offenders. The judgment emphasizes the importance of psychiatric evidence in determining criminal responsibility and the court's protective role in ensuring appropriate treatment and rehabilitation for mentally ill offenders. The case also highlights the court's consideration of community readiness to accept mentally disordered offenders and the need for structured psychiatric intervention before reintegration.