Mugabe impeachment bid goes to ConCourt – NewsDay Zimbabwe

MABVUKU-Tafara MP James Maridadi (MDC-T)’s audacious bid to have Parliament pass a no-confidence vote on President Robert Mugabe may now have to be decided by the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) after the legislature seemingly dithered in making a determination, NewsDay Weekender has learnt.

Source: Mugabe impeachment bid goes to ConCourt – NewsDay Zimbabwe October 8, 2016


Maridadi told NewsDay Weekender this week that authorities at Parliament had failed or deliberately delayed in making a determination on when he could present his motion or better still communicate with him on an adverse decision on his request.

“I have instructed my lawyers to write to Parliament giving notice of our intention to approach the ConCourt with an application seeking an order to force the legislature to allow for Mugabe’s impeachment. I have a right that is enshrined in the Constitution and if they do not want that right to be exercised, they should not have it in there in the first place,” Maridadi said.

In May, Maridadi gave notice to Parliament that he wanted to move a motion to have Mugabe impeached on the grounds that he had failed to run the country properly, failed to rein in rampant corruption and that his age had become an albatross on the country’s progress.

Since then, the MDC-T legislator claims Speaker of the National Assembly Jacob Mudenda has not communicated with him over the matter.

“I understand the kind of predicament that Mudenda finds himself in. It is an unenviable position because once he gives the motion the go-ahead, he is effectively signing Mugabe’s exit. Parliament should have come back to me to say my motion had been denied on what grounds or if my wish had been granted, what date I could present the motion,” Maridadi said. “They should have told me whether my motion had merit or not.”

Curiously though, Mudenda claimed he had responded to Maridadi, but would not elaborate on the contents thereof.
“We have responded to his request. Talk to him,” Mudenda said curtly.

Yet, Maridadi said he was yet to receive any communication from Mudenda.

“I have not received anything. They have not talked to me at all,” Maridadi said, promising to check with the legislature.

Maridadi argued that the motion could save Zanu PF and Zimbabwe from looming possible bloodshed over Mugabe’s throne.

“They must understand that this motion presents a soft landing for Mugabe. It is just a vote and Mugabe will be allowed to go home and rest peacefully, no bloodshed,” Maridadi said.

MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai last weekend told thousands gathered to mark the party’s 17th anniversary in Bulawayo that Mugabe could choose to retire or allow for a vicious scrap for his position. The latter choice, according to Tsvangirai, could plunge the country into anarchy.

“There are two options to the end-game. The first option is a violent one while the second is a peaceful transition. Mugabe must choose one of the two, a violent option where some people get killed because they are demonstrating, or the stage where Mugabe chooses to install his wife, Grace, as President, at which point it becomes gloves off and people confront the regime,” Tsvangirai said.

Mugabe has haplessly watched as his lieutenants engage in a bitter war of attrition to succeed him. The 92-year-old Zanu PF leader insists he will stand as his party’s candidate in elections expected in 2018. He will be 94 amid reports of failing health.

The Zanu PF leader, in power since the end of colonialism 36 years ago, has shown signs of slowing down with a number of gaffes that have made global headlines including an embarrassing tumble at Harare International Airport as well as reading the same speech twice in the space of three weeks on different occasions.


  • comment-avatar

    Freedom to protect and manage my digital data.
    Freedom to choose the providers of service to me and my family without oversight and eavesdropping by government or employers.
    Freedom to be autonomous if I so choose.
    Freedom to manage the chains of responsibility of my data which is me.
    Freedom to interact in a global world environment without government eavesdropping.
    Freedom to own products and services without exploitation or tracking.
    Freedom to research and comment autonomously.
    Freedom to protect my children’s digital footprints.