Constitutional Court throws out war veterans’ challenge to Mnangagwa term extension bill

The Constitutional Court on Wednesday dismissed applications by six liberation war veterans and former legislator Prince Dubeko Sibanda seeking to stop President Emmerson Mnangagwa and Parliament from advancing Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), ruling that the cases were fatally defective and not properly before the court. The matter was heard by a full Constitutional Court bench chaired by Justice Bharat Patel. In its ruling, the court found that the war veterans’ application fell short of critical legal requirements and was therefore fatally defective. The court also dismissed Sibanda’s challenge seeking to halt parliamentary proceedings on the constitutional amendment bill, ruling that the matter was not yet ripe for determination. The applications were among the most high-profile legal challenges against the controversial bill, which proposes sweeping constitutional changes, including extending presidential terms from five to seven years and changing the manner in which future presidents are elected. Speaking after the judgment, lawyer Sylvester Hashiti, who represented President Mnangagwa and Attorney-General Virginia Mabhiza, welcomed the ruling. “They failed to establish anything that we have done wrong in terms of the law and therefore there have no cause of action and the matter was struck off the roll on merits,” Hashiti told journalists. The challenge had been brought by war veterans Reuben Zulu, Godfrey Gurira, Shoorai Nyamangodo, Joseph Chinyangare, Digmore Knowledge Ndiya and Joseph Chinguwa. Represented by constitutional lawyer Professor Lovemore Madhuku, they argued that Mnangagwa acted unlawfully by chairing Cabinet deliberations on the constitutional amendments despite allegedly standing to benefit from the proposed changes. The applicants sought an order declaring Cabinet’s approval of the bill invalid and preventing the president from advancing the legislation. However, Madhuku said the Constitutional Court declined to hear the matter directly, finding that a lower court should first deal with the issues raised. “The Constitutional Court has said it will not entertain the matter on the basis that, although the president has duties we have indicated, those duties are not specific enough to allow the Constitutional Court to exercise its jurisdiction,” Madhuku said. “We came directly to the Constitutional Court alleging that this is the kind of case that must be dealt with by this court directly; that was the argument and they are saying these duties are not specific enough so they declined to exercise their jurisdiction.” Madhuku said the ruling effectively directs the applicants to first seek relief in the High Court before pursuing any constitutional appeal. “This means that the application ought to have been brought before a lower court, that is the High Court, to determine those roles and then it goes up to the Constitutional Court through the normal processes,” he said. He added that the applicants had already instructed him to pursue the matter in the High Court. “We have been given instructions by the applicants to file the matter at the High Court so that which can then determine those broad duties because they are not clear,” Madhuku said. The ruling leaves Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 on course to continue through Parliament, where Zanu PF’s two-thirds majority is expected to secure its passage. Speaker of Parliament Jacob Mudenda gazetted the bill in February, triggering the constitutional process for public consultations before debate and voting in both Houses of Parliament. The post Constitutional Court throws out war veterans’ challenge to Mnangagwa term extension bill appeared first on NewZimbabwe.com .