By Kevin Mapasure
THE small grouping of Zifa board members, still fighting to remain relevant, has lost more ground after their purported suspension of Dynamos chairman Isaiah Mupfurutsa was rubbished by lawyers.
Mupfurutsa’s lawyers yesterday dismissed the purported suspension on the grounds that the Zifa board could not act on behalf of the association since all members were suspended.
The DeMbare boss is represented by Gill, Godlonton and Gerrans Legal Practitioners, who yesterday wrote to the suspended Zifa secretary-general, Joseph Mamutse challenging Mupfurutsa’s suspension.
Mupfurutsa was suspended together with other members of the Zifa congress for their role in calling for an emergency general meeting, whose main agenda is revoking some of the executive committee members’ mandate over a number of transgressions.
A clique of the congress members is calling for the meeting, which was supposed to have been held last week, but could not go ahead after Fifa’s intervention.
Fifa ruled that only the executive committee could call for that meeting, but if they failed, the congress members could organise one by April 3.
After the Fifa ruling, the executive committee went on a purge of the congress members, but their move is not yielding results.
Nine congress members received notices of suspension.
The congress members have alleged that Zifa board members are trying to decimate their numbers so that the meeting fails to take off.
The executive committee has been divided of late, with some members choosing to go against some of the board resolutions, particularly the one on suspending congress members.
Yesterday, Mupfurutsa’s lawyers made it clear that they would not be recognising their client’s suspension since it was done by a grouping that had been suspended by the Sports and Recreation Commission.
“We are aware that the SRC suspended you from the position of general secretary of the Zimbabwe Football Association sometime in January 2021. Without being reinstated to the aforesaid position, you are in no position to take any valid administrative, let alone juristic acts on behalf of Zifa,” the letter reads.
“Although your aforesaid letters and the said suspension purport to be emanating from Zifa, they do not disclose the relevant organ of Zifa between congress and executive committee from which the decision to purportedly suspend our client emanated. The point that we wish to draw to your attention is that in terms of the Zifa constitution, neither congress nor the executive committee has the power to suspend ‘a person’ in the position of our client as purportedly done.
“For this reason, the purported suspension is a nullity and of no force and effect. We have advised out client to ignore it and proceed with the execution of his duties as before.”
The lawyers said the Zifa constitution did not confer any powers on the secretariat to undertake any disciplinary processes against any person, let alone a person in the position of their client.
“The secretariat cannot arrogate to itself those powers. For that reason, apart from it coming from an outsider …, the purported charge is a nullity because it is not provided for in terms of the Zifa constitution,” they said.