Zimbabwe court upholds President Mnangagwa’s election win

Zimbabwe court upholds President Mnangagwa’s election win

Source: Zimbabwe court upholds President Mnangagwa’s election win – BBC News

Emmerson Mnangagwa pictured on 3 August 2018.Emmerson Mnangagwa has been declared the lawful winner of the July presidential poll

President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s win in last month’s polls has been upheld by Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Court.

The opposition MDC Alliance had brought the legal challenge saying the vote was marred by “mammoth theft and fraud”, but this was rejected by the court.

Delivering the verdict, Chief Justice Luke Malaba called allegations of tampering “bold and unsubstantiated”.

It was Zimbabwe’s first election since long-time leader Robert Mugabe was ousted from power last year.

Two days after the vote, at least six people were killed in clashes between the army and MDC Alliance supporters, who alleged that party leader Nelson Chamisa had been robbed of victory.

Ahead of the court ruling, the streets around the courthouse in the capital, Harare, were cordoned off by security forces.

The BBC’s Shignai Nyoka in Harare says that the city’s roads are empty.

Chief Justice Malaba said he had ruled against the opposition’s petition because it lacked “specificity” and failed to meet “the requisite standard of proof”.

“The best evidence would have been the contents of the ballot boxes themselves,” he said.


  • comment-avatar
    Flick 4 years ago

    SURPRISE, SURPRISE !!! I think not.

  • comment-avatar

    There are 9 Judges. They were given those positions by Mugabe.

    They were presumably ZANU-PF members.

    How many of them have farms given by Mugabe?

    What credible legal records has each person got?

    Why did they prevent South Africa Lawyers entry to the Court. Both countries follow Roman Dutch Law.

    Are ZANU – PF judges guilty of collusion by acting for a ZANU -PF

  • comment-avatar

    Elections are about numbers. The judges should not be artificial. A military junta that had a judge in party regalia can’t conduct a proper election. It was well demonstrated that numbers had been interfered with. No doubt the court ignored even evidence admitted by ZEC presided over by a ZANU activist. There is collusion between the judiciary and the executive. Thinking outside the box would have given the judiciary the total independence it had lacked since 1980. You do not ask a victim of theft to show how the theft was done. The person who stole is the one who knows how he stole. He has stolen goods and needs to explain how he got them. Why did the court ignore its power to subpoena the servers? Why were ZEC CDs discounted. It may be high time people with figures knowledge sit on the bench. The 300000 plus people voted in an hour in a mere 1000 polling stations. The probabilities of that being true are zero per cent. So why shy away from establishing that the people were not dealing with stuffed ballots. How can more people than registered vote at a polling station? Why were ballot papers a preserve of ZEC and ZANU? How come ZEC and ZANU recalled MDC A agents for correction of election material after the event? This was all because this election had already been stolen. Forget about freedom in our lifetime. They have got away with murder this time around. Nobody knows how long more they will continue to rule while the majority bark. I bleed when I think of the nine men and women who used technicalities to subvert our will. Run off was avoided because the junta boys are not electable. NC will beat them anytime. Congratulations to advocate mpofu and Advocate NC. You carried forward the hopes of our people but the onlu ATM of state that could have protected our vote was a complete let down. The long sleeve and short sleeve of 2008 was ignored. Assisted graduates at polling stations were made the norm. Assistance of Phds by the uneducated activists. Teachers were disenfranchised and the court says how do we know they would have voted MDC A. Why do the judges pretend to live in another planet? Teachers vote with reason. They want change. We want change. The judiciary has denied us the change and the new.