THE fight over the Samambwa chieftainship between siblings Samuel and David Samambwa is back in court, where the latter is seeking an order to have his brother dethroned, arguing that he is the rightful heir to the throne because he is the eldest son in the family.
BY BLESSED MHLANGA
David was removed from office and replaced by Samuel a few weeks after President Emmerson Mnangagwa took the reins of power, a move that is now subject of a High Court challenge.
However, in a notice of opposition, Samuel, through his lawyer Valentine Mutatu, has called on the court to throw out David’s application, saying the matter can only be settled by Mnangagwa and not the courts.
“Applicant has domestic remedies, which he has not exhausted. Appointments, suspensions and removal of chiefs lie with the President of Zimbabwe and, this is what the supreme law of the land provides. Applicant’s remedies lie with the President, and not this honourable court,” he said.
David recently forwarded his identification documents to prove that he is older than Samuel, but in his rebuttal, the sitting chief said the error was made by former colonial leader, Ian Smith, and should not be taken into account.
“It should be placed on record that the time the identity cards were issued, it was during the white regime and no due processes were followed to ascertain correct information from parents. A majority of people who were born during that time are equally affected,” Samuel said through Mutatu.
However, David, through his lawyer Obert Gutu, argued that the President (then Robert Mugabe) appointed him chief and his removal after the military intervention was unconstitutional .
- 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
“Upon his signature, the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe became functus officio in as far as exercising his constitutional power to appoint me as substantive Chief Samambwa. Neither he nor his predecessor could tamper with the constitutional exercise of power, which saw me being appointed substantive chief.”
