Farirai Machivenyika Senior Reporter
Zanu-pf National Assembly representative for Chegutu West Cde Dexter Nduna has urged the High Court to dismiss MDC-Alliance’s Gift Konjana challenge to his victory in the July 30 harmonised elections for failing to follow procedures.
In his heads of argument filed at the High Court, Cde Nduna, argued that the applicant had not pleaded his case in the manner provided by law.
“It benefits no one to be circuitous and entertain the petitioner’s defective cause longer than necessary. In terms of our electoral law, the virility of the cause or complaint is irrelevant if a party fails to plead and present his case in the manner provided by law,” he said.
“There is no kind way of putting it; the present petition is afflicted by a myriad of procedural infirmities, the non-compliance with the rules and the strict dicta of statute is fatal to the proceedings and should actuate the dismissal of the petition. Put plainly, this matter must turn on a question of law rather than the facts, which if carefully considered, would still not substantiate the petitioner’s prayer.”
Cde Nduna argued that the petition by Mr Konjana did not clarify the relief he was seeking from the courts.
“In casu the petitioner does not, on the face of the petition, particularise the exact relief he craves in accordance with Rule 21 (g) of the Applications, Appeals and Petition Rules 1995 SI 74A of 1995. In fact, the exact relief is only revealed in the attached Draft Order which Order only serves to compound the non-compliance by being worded differently,” Cde Nduna said.
The zanu-pf legislator said the petition was also defective because it sought to set aside the declaration made by ZEC on the 31st of July of an unspecified year while in Draft Order, Mr Konjana, then sought to impugn a Declaration made by a Constituency Elections Officer, who was also not named.
“In fact, the Draft Order doesn’t even state the date when the Declaration was made. This is not the exactitude required by Rule 21 (g) of the Applications, Appeals and Petition Rules 1995 SI 74A of 1995. Our law, through the aforementioned Rule, requires that exact relief sought be enumerated on the face of the petition. The present petition does violence to this rule by describing an incomplete prayer on the face of the petition and then alluding to differently worded relief in the,” Cde Nduna added.
Cde Nduna also said the relief sought by Mr Konjana for him to be declared the winner of the poll was not provided for by the law.