MDC-T MP for Kuwadzana constituency, Nelson Chamisa’s career as a legal practitioner has got off to a turbulent start having been hit by quite a complex controversy in its infancy.
Complex yet not so complex if one takes a closer look. By sitting on the bar, in an assisting role to prominent advocate Thabani Mpofu in the Zuva Petroleum Supreme Court Case, the politician has roused bumble bees. He has courted the ire of workers’ representatives. Criticism has come raining down heavily on Chamisa for “worsening the plight of the worker”.
The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), leading the biting criticism, has made calls for Chamisa to resign. Of note is the spirited claim that Chamisa has betrayed all that his labour-backed MDC-T party ever stood for.
MDC-T is a party owing a lot to the workers; it evolved from labour according to Chamisa’s critics. The ZCTU cites that the politician has forgotten too soon that he owes all that he is to the very workers he has “fought detrimentally” in the court in his new found fame and tutelage.
The Supreme Court ruled in favour of employer, Zuva Petroleum, in a judgment that has triggered mass job terminations with about 9 000 workers so far condemned to join the rest of the unemployed.
Chamisa — for his role — has been described as “a misfit who has gone against the values of his party”. He has been labelled “a square peg in a round hole” and no longer relevant in the workers’ struggle. A lot has been said to discredit the lawmaker. They blame him for “hating workers so much as to want to see them die”.
The attack by the ZCTU and critics alike is, nonetheless, not totally without merit.
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
Keep Reading
Politically, their argument is likely to make sense yet there are legal veracities which should be grasped in regard to this matter.
The thing that should be made abundantly clear is that the judiciary does not have the power to make any law.
The role of the judiciary is simply to interpret and apply the law; It cannot do anything more than that.
Once the lawyers or judiciary start to interfere with the law, they will, in effect, be overstepping their mandate.
So while it is easier to apportion blame and vilify the legislator, the worker representatives would be surprised to be told that they are the ones who should assume real blame and not those who interpreted the law.
The labour bodies should themselves be blamed for sleeping on the wheel.
This law has always been in existence and has absolutely nothing to do with Chamisa or the courts.
This caustic law is precisely what the labour body should have noticed and fought against way back in time.
The Supreme Court did not create any law. At any rate, some other legal team was going to raise this employer right with the same fatal legal consequence at some point in time.
On Chamisa’s part, it is even incredible that he should be blamed; his absence would not have made any difference. With or without Chamisa, workers would still be in the very position they are in today.
The Supreme Court passed a judgment based on existing labour law enshrined in the constitution. Nothing was invented. The ZCTU itself should be culpable for it is this law which they should have seen in time rather than to try and appear relevant by a campaign against individuals.
Chamisa’s involvement or lack thereof is immaterial. It would, in fact, be in place for workers to direct their rage at the ZCTU for failing to see this serious loophole in the law.
A campaign to have the law amended should have long been set if the ZCTU had been alert. I honestly think the ruling is “genocidal”, but my anger is rather directed at the law itself and those who failed to take notice, rather than those who merely interpreted it.
Certainly, the ruling stands to escalate the stress levels and cause deaths of many in an economy already in comatose. While I do not blame the judiciary, in all honest, I feel the ruling is ill-timed at a time when millions are already unemployed.
The ZCTU itself needs to do a self-introspection and realise its role in the workers’ demise rather than springing into action against an individual. Chamisa, like any of us, has a right to pursue a profession of his choice and learn under the tutelage of legal minds of his choice.
ZCTU should, in essence, commit to fighting for the workers instead of fighting lawyers or the courts going about their work. The anger against Chamisa, in my view, is misplaced and probably inspired by other motives we may not be privy to. Instead of debating lawyers let’s debate the law.
Chamisa, in my view did no wrong. He is a man at work. ZCTU should, at this juncture, be focusing on having the law amended rather than focusing on a futile exercise which won’t help matters.
Even Chamisa’s resignation would never reverse the ruling.
Learnmore Zuze is a legal researcher, author and social analyst. He writes here in his own capacity. E-mail:[email protected]
