COLTART, DEPUTY MAYOR CLASH

Bulawayo’s two most senior elected officials, the mayor and deputy mayor, have issued conflicting statements on the legality of recent council proceedings and the status of Town Clerk Christopher Dube’s contract.

The contradictions have plunged the city’s governance into a theatre of chaos, fuelled by competing legal interpretations of Dube’s employment.

In a new development, Deputy Mayor of Bulawayo, Councillor Edwin Ndlovu, has this Monday released a statement declaring the November 5, 2025 meeting was legal and that its resolution to extend the Town Clerk’s contract by a potential five years is “legally binding.”

This assertion directly contradicts the account of Bulawayo Mayor, David Coltart, who last week labelled a subsequent meeting held after he adjourned the session as “illegal,” describing a scene of “mayhem, uproar and shouting” where he was personally threatened and attempts were made to block his exit.

The heart of the conflict is a technical and highly charged debate over the extension of Town Clerk’s contract, which was set to lapse on November 30, 2025.

The situation exposes two contradictory realities, which is one in which the Town Clerk’s contract remains in limbo and another in which Dube has legally secured a five-year extension.

According to the deputy mayor’s chronology, the issue has been simmering for over a year.

Ndlovu said in 2024, the Urban Councils Association of Zimbabwe (UCAZ) advised the council to align the Town Clerk’s contract with the five-year terms common in government and parastatals, moving away from the previous four-year model.

“As Bulawayo we obliged and added two more years so that he gets 2 x 5 years (two potential five-year terms) instead of 2 x 4 (two – four year terms) town clerks were getting,” Ndlovu said.

“Our challenge was that with only a one year addition, the town clerk would be on pensionable age.”

The deputy mayor said another arrangement was made where a second year would be added later via a separate resolution.

“The council then resolved that the second year of the contract shall be added after a second resolution which would allow the Town Clerk to be at work for one year despite him having gone beyond pensionable age,” he said.

The plot thickened on April 7, 2025, when the council received a letter from the Central Government citing Statutory Instrument (SI) 197 of 2024, which changed the retirement age for public officials from 65 to 70 years.

This sparked a bureaucratic and political tussle within the council’s committees.

“As per council procedure, the Human Capital Director brought the issue of the Town Clerk’s contact to the General Purposes Committee to recommend that the Town Clerk’s contract be extended until he reaches 70 years,” Ndlovu said.

The Human Capital department initially recommended seeking a legal opinion on whether the SI applied to fixed-term contracts like the Town Clerk’s.

“On  27 October 2025, the General Purposes Committee received a varied recommendation from the Human Capital department to extend the contract of the town clerk by a year to 30 November 2026 since there was a pending year which was put aside but since the pensionable age is now 70 years,” the deputy mayor said.

“The General Purpose Committee acceded to the recommendation and also proposed that the council seeks legal opinion as to whether a fixed contract is covered by the SI 197 of 2024. If the legal opinion agrees that fixed contract employees are covered by SI 197 of 2024 the council shall add four more years to the town clerk’s contract.”

The deputy mayor said this report of the General Purposes Committee was presented to the full Council Meeting for a resolution on 5 November 2025.

It was here, on 5 November 2025, according to both or all accounts, that the meeting descended into disarray.

Mayor Coltart’s version paints a picture of a democratic process hijacked by intimidation.

“The debate rapidly degenerated into total disorder with certain Councillors making threats against those in favour of the original resolution,” Coltart said.

“Indeed at one point I was threatened.”

 Fearing that a free and fair vote was impossible, Coltart adjourned the meeting and left.

Coltart said as he stood up to leave “one Councillor shouted across the Chamber calling on other Councillors to close the exit door to prevent me from leaving, and as I left one Councillor in fact stood in my way but I got past that person.”

Deputy Mayor Ndlovu’s account contrasts what the mayor said, acknowledging “vibrancy during the debate” but flatly denies any threats or insults.

“I challenge anyone who was threatened or insulted to go to the nearest police station and report the perpetrator,” Ndlovu dared.

Ndlovu states the Mayor’s departure was possibly an abdication of duty, not a restoration of order.

“Before the chairperson of the meeting left, councillors had already made it clear on the extension of the contract. The chair of the meeting merely guides the meeting but shall not usurp the powers of councilors. The meeting should not be abandoned because the chair has different views. There was no need to adjourn the meeting,” he said.

According to his statement, after Coltart left, councillors asked Ndlovu, as Vice-Chair, to take over.

After Ndlovu stepped out to consult, the councillors themselves appointed Councillor Mxolisi Mahlangu to chair the meeting.

It was under this makeshift leadership that the council allegedly took a decisive vote, which was resolving directly to extend the Town Clerk’s contract by one year to November 2026, and then by a further four years to November 2030.

“When I came back councilors had already appointed Councillor M. Mahlangu to chair and continue with the meeting and they confirmed their earlier resolution varying the GP recommendation by adding four more years to the town clerk’s contract on 30 November 2026,” Ndlovu said.

The deputy mayor said this extension was not based on the disputed SI 197 of 2024, but on the council’s own authority, arguing it is their duty to extend the contract “as long as he is not above 70 years which is a legal retirement age.”

“The assertion by councilors is that it is their duty to extend the contract of the town clerk and recommend to the local Government Board as long as he is not above 70 years which is a legal retirement age. This does not need a legal opinion,” Ndlovu said.

To support his claims of a legitimate quorum and decision, Ndlovu said the councillor who continued with the meeting forwarded to him the names and signatures of 28 councillors who continued with the meeting. CITE

Posted in: NEWS