THE MDC-Alliance’s bid to repeal a police order prohibiting
their planned demonstrations in Bulawayo yesterday suffered a major setback
after a magistrate threw out the opposition party’s urgent chamber application
challenging the ban.
The ruling by Mr Tinashe Tashaya follows a notice of appeal
filed on an urgent basis by the MDC Alliance at the Bulawayo magistrate’s court
challenging a prohibition order by the police.
In papers before the court, the officer commanding police
in Bulawayo Central District, Chief Superintendent Elizabeth Phiri and her boss
Commissioner-General Godwin Matanga were cited as respondents.
In dismissing the appeal, Mr Tashaya ruled that there was a
likelihood of violence and destruction of property similar to the January
protests if the MDC-Alliance was allowed to proceed with the demonstration.
He also noted that although citizens have a constitutional
right to stage demonstrations, the same rights had limitations in the interest
of public safety, defence, public morality and health.
“There is no guarantee that the January incident may not be
repeated if the appellant (MDC Alliance) is allowed to go ahead with the
demonstration. Accordingly, the prohibition order is confirmed and the appeal
is hereby dismissed,” ruled the magistrate.
MDC-A notified the police of their planned demonstration on
August 8 this year but the police on Sunday issued an order prohibiting the
event for security reasons.
In its grounds of appeal, through its lawyer Advocate
Perpetua Dube, who was instructed by Tanaka Law Chambers, the party argued that
the reasons for prohibition given in the notice were vague, speculative and
unreasonable.
“The prohibition of the public gathering on grounds such as
those cited by the first respondent (Chief Supt Phiri) is an unlawful and
unconstitutional limitation on the right to freedom of assembly and a violation
of the rights of the members of the appellant,” she said.
“I submit that in our view, the issue is whether the notice
is not an abrogation of the constitution, which gives the appellant’s members
the right to demonstrate. We are concerned that the actions of the respondents
in applying the provisions of the law were unreasonable and vague in the
extreme as there is no substantiation of the allegations of a possibility of
violence.”
Adv Dube said there was no link between the January violent
protests and their planned demonstrations.
Ms Rejoice Hove from the Attorney-General Office, who was
representing the respondents, opposed the appeal. She argued that there was a
possibility of violence with agitated members of the public likely to join in
the protests due to the economic hardships in the country.
She said the police acted in terms of Section 26 (3) of the
Public Order and Security Act to show cause as to why the prohibition order was
issued.
“There have been pointers to a possibility of violence and
the mandate of the first respondent in particular as the officer commanding
Bulawayo Central District, is to ensure that there is no lawlessness in her
area of jurisdiction,” said Ms Hove.
“The first respondent is concerned with the fact that the
purpose of the demonstration is derived from a disputed election outcome. The
MDC Alliance is aggrieved by the Constitutional Court judgment and now wants to
challenge the decision on the streets.”
Ms Hove said flashes of violence were reported last Friday
hence if granted permission to stage demonstrations, MDC Alliance was likely to
engage in violent protests given that the situation was volatile. She said the
police acted on credible information.
Last week, MDC-Alliance’s bid to quash a police order
prohibiting their planned demonstrations in Harare hit a brick wall after
Harare High Court judge Justice Joseph Musakwa dismissed the application saying
the political party had jumped the gun.
MDC-Alliance had notified the police of their planned
demonstration on August 5 this year but the police on Thursday issued an order
prohibiting the event for security reasons. Chronicle
0 comments:
Post a Comment