It was three police officers who arrested Tsitsi Dangarembga almost two years ago.

And it was three days of the trial that the Peace Prize winner of the German book trade had to listen to in Harare's Rotten Row Magistrates Court, together with Julie Barnes, who was with her in court, as each of the three police officers reported for themselves what happened on the day of the arrest in July 2020.

There is no question about what happened back then, even if it was noticed on the second day of the interrogation last Wednesday that the evidence had probably been copied because the originals could no longer be found.

The writer and film director held up a roadside placard in Harare calling for institutional reforms in Zimbabwe.

They exercised the right enshrined in the country's constitution, Chapter 4 Part 1, Item 59, to peacefully demonstrate against abuses.

Three days of trial for three witnesses to an undisputed incident years ago, which only led to the indictment months after the arrest - in September 2020: A look at the circumstances of the trial of one of Zimbabwe's most important artistic voices shows how much the court - possibly the President, who reports directly to this court, is concerned with giving weight to the case.

A weight that the pure process hardly weighs.

But not only the fact

It was a surprise that the proceedings were not dropped due to nullity, as was generally expected.

The statements made by the police officers, or rather their assessments of what actually happened, were astounding.

According to Fungisai Sithole, who observes the trial at the Friedrich Naumann Foundation in Harare, the inspector questioned on June 1 was convinced that the two defendants' protests had undermined the government, incited public violence and could lead to disturbances of the peace.

However, the third police officer who was questioned on Whit Monday contradicted this directly.

He was sure that the posters contained nothing obscene or hurtful and did not incite violence.

The protests of the two accused did not lead to violence, neither of them were spoken to directly, and it was not a violation of the law to demand freedom of the press and a fairer society.

It may be that, as Fungisai Sithole suspects, with the trial of Tsitsi Dangarembga and Julie Barnes, the government once again wanted to demonstrate the state's ruthlessness in dealing with democratic activists.

But the third day of the interrogation showed even more, namely what it means when a police officer on the witness stand sees his duty not in the interests of the powerful but in his country's constitution.