PRESIDENT Emmerson Mnangagwa’s lawyer in the just-concluded
presidential election challenge, Advocate Lewis Uriri, yesterday challenged the
Zanu PF leader’s authority to appoint a special anti-corruption investigative
unit, saying it was illegal for him to just wake up and appoint a government
crack unit without an Act of Parliament, arguing such action was clear abuse of
his duty.
Uriri recently successfully represented Mnangagwa at the
Constitutional Court (ConCourt) against a petition filed by MDC Alliance leader
Nelson Chamisa, who was seeking to overturn the Zanu PF leader’s victory in the
July 30 election.
Addressing Harare magistrate Lazini Ncube, where he was
representing suspended University of Zimbabwe (UZ) vice-chancellor Levi Nyagura
in a criminal abuse of office charge, Uriri also said the prosecutors seconded
by the Office of the President to handle the matter were before the court
illegally.
The National Prosecution Authority had seconded Tapiwa
Godzi and Mikel Chakandida, who are in private practice and were recently
incorporated into the anti-corruption special unit housed in the Office of the
President.
While challenging their presence in court, Uriri said it
was a clear violation of the Constitution to have the prosecutors who directly
report to the President, saying this compromises the administration of justice.
“These prosecutors take instruction from the State
President. They do not report to Prosecutor-General. The President woke up one
morning and said I am putting a commission or a special unit, that is
fundamentally a breach of the Constitution of Zimbabwe,” Uriri said.
“It is an abuse of power for other purposes not known to
us. If there is going to be a conferment of prosecutors who are not from the
Prosecution Authority, such power must be by Act of Parliament.”
“These learned colleagues are subject to control by the
Office of the President. The role of public prosecutor lies at the centre of
the constitutional right to a fair trial. If they are employed by the Office of
the President, are they going to be fair? Obviously they are going to please
their appointing authority, who is the President.”
Uriri asked the court for referral of the matter to the
ConCourt to determine whether the granting of certificates to private lawyers
by the National Prosecuting Authority did not violate the constitutional rights
of the accused person’s right to equal protection under the law.
“Prosecutorial independence lies at the heart to
constitutional right to a fair trial. The public prosecutor is intended by the
Constitution to be independent, impartial and not subject to the direct or
control of someone,” he said.
Uriri further told the court that acting Prosecutor-General
Kumbirai Hodzi had no authority to issue prosecuting certificates, as it
amounted to wilful violation of the Constitution.
But Godzi said Uriri should have challenged the special
prosecutor’s presence during the remand period.
“Uriri should have challenged our presence during the
remand time. We even issued him with all court documents to prepare his
client’s defence. All witnesses have been given their papers. Your worship, it
is just a ploy to delay the proceedings,” Godzi told the court.
Ncube postponed the matter to today for ruling.
Allegations are that sometime in 2011, Nyagura
singlehandedly accepted and approved Ntombizodwa Grace Marufu’s (Grace’s maiden
name) application to study for a Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Sociology
without the knowledge and recommendations of the departmental board and Faculty
of Higher Degrees Committee in violation of UZ quality assurance, guidelines
and benchmark.
Nyagura allegedly abused his position after showing favour
to Grace, who did not meet the minimum requirements to study for the degree. It
is alleged Nyagura’s action had the capacity to discredit Zimbabwe’s education
system, thereby affecting its international rankings. Newsday
0 comments:
Post a Comment