Neither MDC Alliance nor MDC-T can receive any of the $7.5
million political funding under the Political Parties Finance Act until a
resolution on the ongoing legal battle over which formation is entitled to the
money is settled, the Supreme Court has ruled.
The Nelson Chamisa-led MDC Alliance and the Dr Thokozani
Khupe-led MDC-T are embroiled in a vicious legal battle over the control of the
opposition MPs and Senators elected in 2018, and thus the $7.5 million to be
paid under the Political Parties Finance Act.
MDC Alliance successfully applied for an interim order
before Justice Priscilla Munanfati-Manongwe at the High Court in May, to block
to the Thokozani Khupe-led MDC-T from receiving the disbursement.
The alliance had sued the Minister of Justice, Legal and
Parliamentary Affairs and Minister of Finance and Economic Development — who
then appealed against the judgment of Justice Munangati-Manongwa at the Supreme
Court.
There, a panel comprising Justice Chinembiri Bhunu, Justice
Tendai Uchena and Justice Alfas Chitakunye partially allowed the appeal, but
with the consent of both parties’ legal counsel blocked both formations from
receiving the money until the underlying legal dispute is settled.
Under the Political Parties Finance Act, all parties that
poll more than 5 percent of the vote in a general election share the sum
budgeted for political parties each year in proportion to their votes.
By-election results can alter those proportions.
The critical legal issue is whether the MDC-A was simply an
electoral alliance, or a full party in its own right.
If it was just an alliance with the MDC-T as its main
partner, then the decision of the Supreme Court earlier this year would have
major significance. The Supreme Court then declared Mr Chamisa’s leadership of
the MDC-T when the Alliance was formed to be illegitimate and ordered that the
2014 leadership, headed by Dr Khupe, was the legitimate interim leadership by
MDC-T rules, but it had to hold an election within three months to choose the
leader of the party. That congress, which was scheduled to take place today,
was deferred due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
After the Supreme Court ruling, Dr Khupe moved to take
control of the opposition, recalling a number of MDC Alliance legislators from
Parliament and several councillors sympathising with Mr Chamisa on the basis
that these had been the MDC-T’s nominees in the MDC-A line-up.
There are now two contradictory High Court rulings. In her
ruling, Justice Munangati-Manongwa acknowledged the MDC Alliance as a political
party with capacity to sue and be sued, which is contrary to the findings of
another judge of the same court, Justice Tawanda Chitapi, who ruled that MDC
Alliance does not legally exist as it is just an electoral pact.
The Supreme Court will now probably have to be asked to
make a definitive ruling on the status of the MDC-A and whether those elected
under the MDC-A name in 2018 belong to the MDC-A or belong to the underlying
formations, including the MDC-T, that came together in the MDC-A.
There could be another legal battle over MDC-T assets that
were taken over by the MDC-A on the say so of the then MDC-T executive led by
Mr Chamisa, an executive now found to have been improperly formed by the
MDC-T’s own rules.
Depending on how the legal battle progresses, several
alternatives present themselves. It could be found that the MDC-A is a
political party that came second in the 2018 elections, but was not entitled to
take over MDC-T assets. Or it could be found that the MDC-A is simply an
electoral alliance of several parties that presented a single presidential
candidate and a single candidate in each constituency election, but has no
control over the successful candidates. There are other options that may come
to the attention of judges trying to disentangle the legal minefield. Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment