GOVERNMENT regulations restricting business hours to
between 8am and 3pm to curb the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic are not in
violation of the country’s laws, the High Court has ruled.
The ruling on Friday came after the Zimbabwe Lawyers for
Human Rights (ZLHR) challenged the legality of Statutory Instrument 174 of 2020
which compels businesses to close by 3pm.
The recent spike in confirmed coronavirus infections,
prompted Government to impose a dusk-to-dawn curfew as part of a raft of
measures to stop the spread of the lethal pandemic which has so far killed 132
people from 5 261 recorded cases.
Security forces are enforcing the curfew between 6pm and
6am while all non-working people are required to stay at home, except when they
want to buy groceries or seek medical attention.
Only those providing essential services are allowed to work
outside the stipulated hours.
Following the arrest of jpolitical activist Hopewell
Chin’ono and opposition politician Jacob Ngarivhume, lawyers representing the
duo, Ms Beatrice Mtetwa and Moses Nkomo — both instructed by the ZLHR — could
not persuade a Harare magistrate to continue hearing bail applications beyond
3pm.
Court officials said they were adhering to Government
regulations on business hours.
This prompted the ZLHR to rush to the High Court,
challenging the regulations, arguing this was unconstitutionally disadvantaging
arrested persons.
In its lawsuit, ZLHR listed the Judicial Service Commission
(JSC) and National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), the Minister of Justice, Legal
and Parliamentary Affairs and the Minister of Health and Child Care as
respondents.
They wanted Statutory Instrument 174 of 2020 not to limit
the sitting of the magistrates’ court when dealing with initial bail
applications and challenges to placement on remand.
But Justice Clement Phiri dismissed the application for
interim relief sought, finding merit on the preliminary points raised by JSC
lawyer Mr Addington Chinake of Kantor and Immerman.
Mr Chinake had argued that allegations against Chin’ono,
Ngarivhume and Harare mayor Herbert Gomba mentioned in the ZLHR’s founding
affidavit, were not properly before the High Court.
He said in the absence of any cogent and acceptable proof
of the allegations made in the form of supporting affidavits, his client
believed that the applicant’s case was speculative.
The allegations, he argued, were based on hearsay and
conjecture and the JSC was of the view that the court could not grant the
relief sought on the grounds of such speculative apprehension.
Mr Chinake also argued that the ZLHR’s seeking of a
declaration of constitutional invalidity of the law on return date, was not
proper at the interim stage.
After considering the preliminary points raised by Mr
Chinake at the beginning of the legal proceedings, the judge found merit in the
issues raised against the human rights lawyers.
“It is this court’s considered view that the applicant in
this matter, has failed to take this court into its confidence and justify why
this matter should be treated as urgent,” he said.
In that regard, ZLHR failed to prove a strong case that the
regulations are unlawful hence the court was not in a firm position to grant
the relief sought.
“Accordingly, the points in limine raised for and on behalf
of the first respondent are upheld and the application for interim relief is
hereby dismissed with costs,” said Justice Phiri.
In their urgent application, the ZLHR wanted an order
compelling the respondents, in the interim, to put into place measures and
facilities which ensure that the courts, when dealing with challenges to
placement on remand and bail applications shall not be imperilled by the
timelines set out under the Public Health (Covid-19 Prevention, Containment and
Treatment) (National Lockdown Amendment) Order 2020.
ZLHR director Ms Roselyn Hanzi had argued in her affidavit
that in practice, once a bail application or challenge to placement on remand
had commenced, it was supposed to be heard to finality before the court
adjourned for the day.
She said bail matters had previously been granted or
refused well after hours and times well into the evening. Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment