ZIMBABWE Human Rights NGO Forum executive director Musa Kika yesterday snubbed a Constitutional Court hearing which sought to reverse a High Court order dismissing the extension of Chief Justice Luke Malaba’s term of office.
Kika said he fears that the conflicted judges will not
deliver a fair verdict. Three High Court judges, justices Happias Zhou, Edith
Mushore and Jesta Charehwa ruled in May that Malaba ceased being a Chief
Justice when he reached the retirement age of 70.
President Emmerson Mnangagwa extended the top judge’s term
using controversial constitutional amendments that raised the retirement age
for judges to 75.
Zanu PF activist Marx Mupungu, represented by Lovemore
Madhuku, filed a ConCourt challenge against the High Court ruling which was
heard yesterday, with the judges indefinitely reserving judgment.
On Wednesday, the ConCourt bench led by Deputy Chief
Justice Elizabeth Gwanza dismissed Kika’s application for recusal of the
judges.
After the judges refused to recuse themselves, Kika stopped
filing opposing papers saying it was a forgone issue that conflicted judges
would not deliver a fair outcome.
Kika’s lawyers said they decided to confine their case to
the preliminary point of recusal because they felt strongly that it was
irregular for the court to sit over its own matter.
“Constitutional Court sat to determine the case brought by
Marx Mupungu against Musa Kika and Young Lawyers Association of Zimbabwe
(YLAZ),” Kika’s lawyer Noble Chinanhu said after the hearing.
Only lawyers representing the YLAZ and war veteran
Frederick Charles Moses Mutandah, who were part of the respondents in Mupungu’s
case, appeared for the ConCourt hearing.
YLAZ asked the court to dismiss the case arguing that
Mupungu had no locus standi to file an application to challenge the validity of
the ruling by the three High Court judges.
The young lawyers, represented by Andreas Dracos, argued
that Mupungu was not part of the proceedings in the High Court case, hence did
not have the capacity to sue in relation to that matter.
But Madhuku defended Mupungu’s right to file for the
application, stating that just like any other citizen, he had an interest in
the matter.
Mupungu argued in the ConCourt application that Mnangagwa
acted within the law in extending Malaba’s term.
Lawyer Tawanda Zhuwara, appointed as the amicus curiae,
said YLAZ and Kika did not seek leave to sue High Court judges as stipulated
under Order 3 Rule 18 of the High Court.
But Dracos said the application to challenge Malaba’s extended tenure was urgent, based on Section 85 of the Constitution.
0 comments:
Post a Comment