Concourt hearing on axed MPs set for Tuesday

via Concourt hearing on axed MPs set for Tuesday | The Herald April 11, 2015 by Daniel Nemukuyu

All is set for the Constitutional Court to hear the matter in which 21 former MDC-T legislators aligned to Mr Tendai Biti’s Renewal Team are challenging their expulsion from Parliament.

Parties in the constitutional matter filed their heads of argument and all the relevant papers yesterday afternoon ahead of the hearing next Tuesday.

The 21, comprising 17 fired from the National Assembly and four from the Senate, argue that MDC-T split into two and the Speaker of Parliament Advocate Jacob Mudenda and Senate President Cde Edna Madzongwe erred by considering the Morgan Tsvangirai-led group as the legitimate MDC-T party.

It is the group’s argument that only a competent court of law had jurisdiction to determine the legitimate owners of the party before Adv Mudenda and Cde Madzongwe announced the 21 vacancies.

To that end, the ex-legislators argued, Section 129(1) (k) invoked by Parliament to announce the vacancies was not applicable under the circumstances.

“It is the contention of the applicants that Section 129(1)(k) does not apply to the circumstances,” they argued.

“Alternatively, it is their contention that Section was not complied with.

“The MDC-T, the political party of which the affected members were members of at the time of their election, has spilt into two formations, each claiming to be the MDC-T,” the legislators argued.

“There is no order of court declaring one of the two formations to be the “political party concerned” for purposes of Section 129(1) (k).

“The 1st and 2nd respondents (Adv Mudenda and Cde Madzongwe) determined that the other formation of the MDC-T is “the political party concerned” for purposes of Section 129(1) (k) and invoked the said section to create vacancies in Parliament.”

Adv Mudenda and Cde Madzongwe, through their lawyers Chihambakwe, Mutizwa and Partners, filed their heads, arguing that their actions were above board as Section 129(1) (k) of the Constitution compelled them to make an announcement of the existence of the vacancies.

The expulsion of the 21, according to Parliament, was done by none other than the Mr Tsvangirai led MDC-T, but surprisingly the party was never cited as a respondent.

Parliament argued that it did not expel the 21, but their seats became vacant by operation of law.

Adv Mudenda and Cde Madzongwe argued that they had no duty to make any inquiries or to adjudicate over the legitimacy of the notices sent to them by MDC-T.

President Mugabe’s action in proclaiming the election dates, according to his lawyer Mr Terrence Hussein, was proper and in compliance with the supreme law of the land.

Once the President receives notification of the vacant seats, he is obliged to make a proclamation in terms of the Constitution.

Mr Tawanda Kanengoni of Nyika Kanengoni Legal Practitioners filed some papers on behalf of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission.

He indicated that Zec would simply abide by the decision of the court in the matter.


  • comment-avatar

    Yebo kunjani manje uBITI ukuphi manje?

  • comment-avatar

    Kodwa into zabo tswangarai madoda

  • comment-avatar
    Kufandada 7 years ago

    This is a simple matter for the Constitutional Court.
    (1) Parliament received a Notice from the MDC-T advising it that the 21 members had been expelled from MDC-T.
    (2) Biti and others did not challenge their expulsion in any court of law.
    (3) Parliament is not an adjudicator and acted in accordance with the law.Once parliament receives Notice from the legitimate party,it acts accordingly.
    (4) There was no split in the party.Biti and others were dismissed from the party.

  • comment-avatar
    nkosinathi mkwanazi 7 years ago

    Why waste time. Just participate the by Elections as whatever name. U were not dismissed from MDC T bt u said MDC T lacks leadership Which lead to the negative result of 2013 which was suspected to be a Nikuv operation. 2day its yo call join the wagon train.