via RadioVop Zimbabwe – Devolution Test Case For ConCourt Judges 03 March 2015
Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Court judges will on Wednesday preside over a test case in which Lobengula legislator and former cabinet Minister Samuel Sipepa Nkomo wants the government to implement the concept of devolution, which has been a sticking point between President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU PF party and opposition parties.
Despite being one of most popular forms of governance preferred by Zimbabweans who participated in public outreach meetings during the constitution making exercise, the government has neglected to implement devolution.
Nkomo, the former Water Resources Minister in the coalition government of President Robert Mugabe and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai is represented by Tendai Biti of Tendai Biti, a member of Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights.
The former Minister who now belongs to the MDC Renewal party wants the Constitutional Court to order Cabinet to bring before Parliament a Bill that gives effect to devolution within 45 days of an order being granted.
The legislator argues that by refusing to cause the enactment of an Act of Parliament giving effect to Constitutional provisions catering for devolution, the government is failing the majority of Zimbabweans who asked for such a system of governance.
Nkomo argues that implementing devolution “is in fulfilment of the overwhelming submissions and requests that were made by the people of Zimbabwe during the Constitutional making exercise”.
During the outreach programme to collect public preferences on the new Constitution, the majority of people preferred devolution as a form of governance over the centralised system.
Nkomo argues that government should therefore have treated devolution “as a matter of urgency and rushed” to comply with the Constitution.
According to Nkomo “devolution is key and central in the part of the country which I come from and in the Constituency I represent.”
He argues that 45 days for government to cause the enactment of the necessary Act of Parliament were “extremely reasonable”. “The process is simple and can be expedited. The flurry of Bills which were approved by the 7th Parliament towards the end of its term, which included the Micro Finance Bill and the Money Laundering Legislation, were all fast tracked.”
Minister of Local Government, Rural and Urban Development Dr Ignatius Chombo is cited as the first respondent while Vice President and Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Minister Emmerson Mnangagwa is cited as the second respondent. The government of the Republic of Zimbabwe is cited as the third respondent.
President Robert Mugabe’s ZANU PF party and his ruling administration have for years rejected the concept of devolution which has been advocated for by opposition parties.
COMMENTS
Zimbabwe’s judiciary are better known for kow-towing to Mr Mugabe than upholding any law that he does not like..
an important cause of our failure as a nation. !
The mind boggles when one sees articles like this. We all know our comrades want and have a one party state thus devolution does not suit their evil plans. This pretense in democracy by ZanuPISSCATS will continue for as long as Zanu is in power. Pasi ne ZanuPF.
I totally second Mr Sipepa. Let’s wait and see how this court will reach it’s conclusion.
I don’t think that any of us are that naive to think that the Judiciary has an ounce of impartiality when it comes to Political judgements. They follow instructions from their superiors who in turn get the instructions from the Zanu pf party. I am not saying the courts should not be used. Contrary to that it has to be shown how biased they are by taking these cases forward. Only I would not hold my breath. Even if they did grant the judgement it would be ignored and there is nothing the courts could do about it. When Zimbabwe is finally free it will be a mammoth task to get the Police, Judiciary and other arms of the Law back to normalcy. This has gone on so long that some of our grown children have known nothing else lawlessness and they think it’s the norm.
What you are saying is totally correct. We only need to satisfy ourselves that we did follow the only viable root and failed. There is no element of illusion in my mind that anything substantial and solid will come out of this court. But exhausting the available avenues is our only option, under the circumstances.