Zimpapers Logo

Chief Justice Chidyausiku

Daniel Nemukuyu Senior Court Reporter
Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku yesterday ruled that the case in which 21 MDC-T members are contesting their expulsion from Parliament was urgent and set the matter for a Constitutional Court hearing on April 14.

The 21 members — 17 from the National Assembly and four from the Senate — were recently expelled from Parliament after the MDC-T led by Mr Morgan Tsvangirai wrote to the Speaker of the National Assembly and the president of the Senate seeking their seats to be declared vacant for aligning themselves to a rival faction.

Also read…

• Chidyausiku to rule on 21 MDC-T MPs today

• MDC-T in catch-22 situation

• June 10 polls for recalled MPs seats

• 21 MDC-T legislators challenge expulsion

Parliament expelled the legislators who had aligned themselves to the Sekai Holland-led Renewal Team after MDC-T disowned them, saying they no longer represented its interest in the House by joining a recently formed political outfit, United Movement for Democratic Change. The UMDC party is a merger between the Renewal Team and Professor Welshman Ncube’s MDC.

Chief Justice Chidyausiku granted the application with the consent of all the parties involved.

He directed Parliament, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission and other respondents to file their opposing papers by April 8.

The 21 legislators are supposed to file their answering affidavit by April 9 while their heads of argument should be filed by April 10.

By April 11 the respondents will file their heads of argument ahead of the hearing on April 14.

The parties were led into the chambers of the Chief Justice by Chief Registrar Mr Munamato Mutevedzi and the hearing took less than 10 minutes.

Professor Lovemore Madhuku, instructed by Biti Law Chambers, acted for the 21 legislators while Mr Simplicius Chihambakwe represented Parliament.

Mr Tawanda Kanengoni of Nyika Kanengoni law firm represented the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission.

Mr Chihambakwe yesterday confirmed the court’s decision to journalists after the hearing.

“We have consented to the granting of the chamber application and the case will now be heard as an urgent one by the full Constitutional Court bench on April 14,” he said.

Mr Biti said his side had won the preliminary case.

“Yes, our application was granted and the matter will now be heard as an urgent case before the set date for the Nomination Court,” he said.

Two separate applications were filed — one in respect of 17 MPs who lost their National Assembly seats and the other for the four expelled from the Senate.

The 21 argued that their expulsion was unconstitutional as there was no proof that they were no longer with the MDC-T and that the courts were still to determine the legitimate party between the Tsvangirai-led group and the Biti faction.

It is the group’s position that the court should nullify the decision by the Speaker of Parliament Advocate Jacob Mudenda and the President of the Senate Edna Madzongwe and wait for the courts to decide which group led the bona fide MDC-T.

The group argued that the National Assembly Speaker and the Senate president ought to have granted them audience before making a ruling.

It is the group’s contention that the two acted like judges and regarded the Tsvangirai-led party as the legitimate one.

They argued that they were still MDC-T members and that they never resigned from the party.

They argued that Mr Tsvangirai had no power to fire them considering that the real party owners were yet to be determined in pending court cases.

Section 129 (1) (k) invoked to fire the group, according to the application, does not apply in the situation.

It is the group’s argument that nothing has changed from the time when Parliament refused to adjudicate over the MDC-T dispute and that there was no proof that the Renewal group had formed the United MDC as alleged.

It is argued that Section 129 (1) (k) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe only existed to prevent floor crossing and it was not a recall position.

The group argued that the Constitution did not provide for recalling of legislators.

Parliament’s decision was described as muddled, grossly unreasonable, incompetent and in breach of the people’s right to equal protection of the law as guaranteed and protected by the Constitution of Zimbabwe. Parliament’s decision is also alleged to have breached the legislators’ right to form, join and participate in the activities of a political party of their choice.

The group’s right to stand for election and, if elected, to hold public office, was also infringed by the decision, they argued.