The ruling by Bulawayo High Court judge Justice Maxwell
Takuva follows an application by Tsholotsho RDC challenging the decision by
PRAZ chairperson Mr Joel Mambara to set aside its decision to award the tender
to Matupula Hunters.
In March 2019, Tsholotsho RDC flighted a tender for a joint
venture elephant hunting concession for Tsholotsho North constituency, which it
eventually awarded to Matupula Hunters.
However, a rival safari operator, Lodzi Hunters and Safaris
expressed dissatisfaction with the process and procedures used by Tsholotsho
RDC in determining the outcome and challenged the decision at the High Court.
Lodzi Hunters and Safaris also wrote to PRAZ, which ruled
in its favour, arguing that the awarding of a joint hunting concession tender
to Matupula Hunters in Tsholotsho North was illegal.
According to PRAZ, which is responsible for controlling and
regulating the procurement processes of Government departments, ministries and
parastatals, Cabinet approval must be sought in joint ventures of such a
nature. Mr Mambara, in his final determination following the sitting of a
review panel, ruled that the procurement proceedings were riddled with gross
irregularities and illegalities.
In its papers challenging Mr Mambara’s decision, Tsholotsho
RDC, which was represented by Mr Job Sibanda of Job Sibanda and Associates,
cited PRAZ, its chairperson and Lodzi Hunters as respondents.
In its application, Tsholotsho RDC argued that the
purported review proceedings chaired by Mr Mambara were grossly irregular and
irrational.
Mr Mambara and PRAZ did not oppose the application. Lodzi
Hunters, which was represented by Advocate Perpetua Dube instructed by Ncube
Attorneys, argued that Tsholotsho RDC was “forum shopping” by failing to
exhaust domestic remedies provided by the Act.
Adv Dube said nullifying the review panel proceedings does
not resolve the underlying dispute.
Justice Takuva said the High Court has, at common law,
power to review the proceedings of all administrative tribunals, both domestic
and statutory in terms of sections 26 and 27 of the High Court Act.
He ruled that the review panel is not a court of law, but a
creature of statute whose powers are confined to reviewing what has been raised
in the papers by the parties. He said the court did not find any merit in Lodzi
Hunters’ complaint that what Tsholotsho RDC sought in this case would not
resolve the matter.
“It is hereby ordered that the purported review chaired by
the first respondent (Mr Mambara) in respect of a tender carried out by the
applicant under Tsholotsho North hunting concession tender number TRDC 03/10 be
and are nullified. The third respondent shall pay the costs of this application,”
ruled Justice Takuva.
Lodzi Hunters and Matupula Hunters are both legitimate
holders of hunting permits in the Tsholotsho North and Tsholotsho South areas
respectively. The two safari operators have been at loggerheads for years over
hunting permits. Lodzi and Matupula Hunters have been locked in a dispute over
the hunting rights in Tsholotsho North for years.
In 2017, Matupula Hunters contested the decision by the
local authority to give Lodzi Hunters a permit to conduct elephant hunting in
the same area in which it has exclusive safari rights for five years for the
purpose of raising funds for the construction of a football stadium.
In 2015, when the need to fund the construction of
Tsholotsho Stadium arose, the local authority decided to give Lodzi permission
to hunt in the whole of Tsholotsho district, including the area exclusive to
Matupula Hunters.
Matupula Hunters engaged council to settle the matter, but
to no avail, as the local authority, together with Lodzi, insisted that they
had the right to bring hunters to shoot elephants in Tsholotsho, leading to the
court dispute.
Over US$360 000 raised for the construction of a stadium
through the sale of 60 elephants, each going for US$18 000, which were in 2013
donated by the Environment, Water and Climate Change ministry then under Mr
Saviour Kasukuwere, was allegedly stolen. Chronicle
0 comments:
Post a Comment