HomeLocal NewsChamisa was sloppy – ED

Chamisa was sloppy – ED


PRESIDENT-ELECT Emmerson Mnangagwa has accused opposition MDC Alliance leader Nelson Chamisa’s lawyers of insulting the judiciary at campaign rallies and also failing to submit all the alleged evidence of vote rigging and manipulation of the July 30 elections before the Constitutional Court, where he is challenging the presidential results.


In his voluminous response, Mnangagwa said Chamisa failed to meet the standards set out and, therefore, should not be heard in court (ConCourt), calling for his application to be dismissed.

“I am aware of a decision by this court to the effect that all evidence in an election challenge under section 93 of the Constitution must be placed before the court at the time the S93 is filed. Therefore, the S93 is not properly before the courts, firstly because it’s incomplete and thereby failing to meet the jurisdictional requirements … and secondly, because it was not properly served,” submitted Mnangagwa.

He further accused Chamisa and his legal team of trying to serve Attorney-General (AG), Prince Machaya instead of serving him at his residence and when he was eventually served, the service was out of time.

“The Sherriff only served the application on me on 11 August at 1030hrs, a day out of time. Consequently, there is no valid court application before the court,” Mnangagwa said.

“The application was filed on the 10th August 2018. I am sued in my capacity as a candidate and not as the President of Zimbabwe. Accordingly, service of the application ought to have been done at the address I gave to Zimbabwe Electoral Commission in my nomination papers. This was not done. This is incurably fatal and cannot be condoned.”

Chamisa’s chief elections agent Jameson Timba said the AG had received the papers on behalf of Mnangagwa. But in his response, Mnangagwa said the AG had refused to take service of the papers.

“Naturally, the AG refused to accept service on my behalf. The applicant’s lawyers wrongfully insisted on leaving the incomplete A93 application. He was advised that certain compact discs would be served later. These still have not been served on me,” he said.

Mnangagwa also said he had not even received the evidence placed before the courts by Chamisa because it was missing from the application served on him.

“The application refers to a “bundle of evidence” in his founding affidavit. This was not part of the S93 application that was filed and irregularly served on me. I do not accept that this was valid service. Even assuming valid service, which is denied, the service of an incomplete application is not the service contemplated by law,” he said.

Mnangagwa submitted that in view of his submission, his election was not even being legally challenged and, therefore, the courts should dismiss Chamisa’s application.

“It follows that my election to the office of President of (the) Republic of Zimbabwe has not been validly challenged. I, therefore, urge this honourable court to dismiss this application as there is no valid challenge to my election. The tool of an election challenge is frequently used to cast doubt on the integrity of the election,” Mnangagwa submitted.

Mnangagwa further submitted that Chamisa had no right to approach the courts because at one of his rallies in Bulawayo, he told supporters that the courts were not independent and were the President’s bedroom.

“The next objection is that the applicant has scandalised the court (from) which he purports to seek relief and assistance. He has deliberately and consistently said that the court is a captive of the executive and an extension of my party. Throughout his campaign, applicant has said that he will not approach the courts of the Republic of Zimbabwe,” he said.

The Zanu PF leader said Chamisa had told his supporters during the campaign period that he would only approach the courts once he was in power and the judiciary had become independent.

“The applicant, having scandalised the court, cannot be heard until he purges his scandal. He is a legal practitioner. He took oath to uphold and obey the Constitution and laws of Zimbabwe. He remains an officer of the court, the third pillar of the State which he has decided to scandalise. He must purge his scandalous contempt. If he declines to do so, the inquiry required by section 93 (3) of the Constitution must be determined without him being heard any further in these proceedings,” Mnangagwa said.

Recent Posts

Stories you will enjoy

Recommended reading


  1. ho hoo your arguments are pathetically weak and donot seem to come from a trained lawyer Mr President. You also seem to be worried about technical issues because you are aware of the merit of Chamisa’s court challenge. A competent COn Court cannot dismiss such a case on such arguments.

    • Procedural matters are very important my friend. This is not a magistrates court or even the High court. This is the constitutional court of the nation. You cannot submit incomplete documentation and hope to get away with it. If you read the submission by ZEC you will note that Chamisa’s lawayers did not even fill in the requisite application form which constitutes ‘the application’. Clearly this matter will be dismissed before plea. Further, the opposing affidavits by both ZEC and ED delve into the material issues raise by Chamisa. This article did not delve into these. Please make an effort to read before commenting. It is not going to be easy for the applicant. S93 places onerous requirements on any challenge to the results. Clear and uncontestable evidence is needed by the court and it must be submitted by the applicant. It appears that some of the said evidence was not submitted. I understand that the lawyers intended to then bring that evidence on the date of the hearing. Clearly this is not allowed as s93 clearly states that all the evidence must be submitted with the application. On this basis it is going to be difficult for Chamisa and his team.

      • What you all need to understand is that procedure and process are not the same. Chigumba responded because they were served. The absence of a form did not disadvantage them in any way and neither does it undermine the weight of the case or the accusation leveled at ZEC. The form is not theirs but the courts. Any reasonable person would understand what process was being carried out. The procedure of carrying out the process may not have been to the letter but it did not deviate significantly from the letter and thus can be easily understood by the recipient that is why they responded. If there was a wide deviation then they wouldn’t have responded.

      • @Mugomezi you know the law. Ambush tactics are not admissible in court because the respondent should respond fully to an application kwete madhaka aya. Now that the ConCourt will deal with presented documents saka Chamisa anofunga kuti the respondents vachapindura papi? No viva voce evidence will be led and It will be dismissed on a technicality and Sunday 26 August inauguration

    • you are just sympathetic with Chamisa and you also fail to understand the operations of a court. Facts and evidence have to be brought on the ground not mere allegations without substance

  2. ho hoo your arguments are pathetically weak and donot seem to come from a trained lawyer Mr President. You also seem to be worried about technical issues because you are aware of the merit of Chamisa’s court challenge. A competent COn Court cannot dismiss such a case on such arguments.

    • Mungagodii chimbozvifadzayi nenhema dzakapusa idzodzo. Chii chinonzi weak in law between failure to produce evidence and sighting of weaknesses in the petition by the applicant. Handiti nyaya iri mumaoko edare repamusoro pekupedzisira muno munyika. So why worry if the President’s arguments are weak? You have to celebrate because it means chanyiswa has won. Muchafenda henyu mati madii kkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

  3. fear fear if he knows he won straight up wats he worried about n why of all the candidates he was e last n most complicated one to serve

  4. Deciding a case of such importance to your legitimacy on a weak techniciality does not give confidence. Why not let the judges deal with technical issues & you focus on defending your rigging.

  5. its clear chamisa does not have any prove of the alleged rigging,there is not even a single practical and tangible evidence, his accisations are like a political gimmick, or propaganda at a campaign rally of which this does not work in the courts, its another sad loss for the young man again. dont buy time young man your supporters you fooled are waiting for your explanation why you let them butchered when you and Biti were in abscondence

  6. chamisa has nothing to show up and he is aware that this is the end of his carrier as a politician, ndopafira MDC T ipapa chamisa akutodzokera kunoita lawyer and i think akadaro anenge atigonera isu vana vemuzimbabwe nekuti zvekuti aite mutuingamiriri wenyika ino uuuuu aratidza kuti achiri pwere even ukada kuteerere zvaaitaura pama rallies ake zvizere neuhucheche chaihwo. semutungamiriri haufaniri kuita ruzha rwunenge rwichiitwa nevatsigiri asi unofanira kunge uri munhu akadzikama .ndofunga ndosa neAmerica yakamunyima mari nema resources zveku campaining vakaona kuti matauriro emunhu uyu achirikuratidza hupwere saka regai tingomuti dzokera hako kuZimbabwe tichatumira mari asi vasara vakangoti apa hapana chedu kkkkk saka haa ngaambokura hake chamisa

  7. The electoral playing field was not even or fair, ZBC & Herald blatantly refused to air a single advert by MDC, that evidence alone is enough to declare the elections null & void

  8. Declaring elections void now is not an option. Tongoswerera mahumbwe here munyika inezviwanikwa kudai? Ngavatungamire VaMnangagwa voedza kuita zvavakavimbisa toona kusvika pa 2023 kuti vanenge vabudisa chii.

  9. Wait for the court to give its final judgement. Stop provoking and insulting each other. The Republic of Zimbabwe is for us, either you’re a ZANU PF supporter or an MDC supporter.

  10. I like to read these comments they are very enlightening. We are from various backgrounds therefore our opinions vary. You shall notice that the Concourt will come up with a very different opinion from that offered by both the applicants and the defendants. It will come up with a reasoned judgement, researched facts and educated analyses. I advise you all to buy the judgement and read it for yourselves for those who do not know how you can then wait to buy the Law Report for 2018. Zvidhara zvacho zvakadzidza.But on a mbasambasa bases Chamisa akasinga black ball kushaudha court. its called “Dirty Hands Principle” so Chamisa 0 Munangagwa 1.

  11. Did you rig the elections or not Mnangagwa?Ndopane nyaya yese ipapo,zvekuti Chamisa filed his papers in court after the time had lapsed hazvina kana basa izvo,because even if you force yourself kuti pfee pavanhu vasingakude, sooner or later uchangotsabvurwa zvinonyadzisa.

  12. I am not conversant with soccer so naturally I do not comment on soccer matters. Mr/Ms “Anonymous” should just do the same where legal matters are concerned because it is loud and telling that he is a complete stranger to the legal fraternity.

  13. Chamisa has no case, he just wants ED to eat the porridge mixed with pit sand. Initially he poured river sand in the porridge by causing the deaths of 6 or seven people. ED threw away that porridge and prepared new porridge. Chamisa has now poured pit sand in that porridge. Chamisa is attracting the attention of Europe, UK and the USA. He does not want the three blocks to remove the economic sanctions they imposed. But mark my words, Chamisa will not succeed against ED. ED’s power is in his silence. His ability to make his opponents second guese his next move.

  14. Its irresponsible for all parties involved Chamisa, Mnangangwa and ZEC to disclose the so called evidence in the press instead of the court it gives the opponents an idea of what to expect in court but anyway im just a conserned citizen let seat back on my couch eat some pop corn while the drama unfolds

  15. ko e.d akutyei….kana achizia kuti haana ku riga ngaanyarare ka ozozvipruva mucourt……ed ngaasa panika semapanikire aakaita befo erections adter mugabe ati vote fo chamisa.ed is too old to panick.let de nyaya b solvd in court.de courts wil prov if chamisa has de facts or not…….u guyz so

  16. Nhai iwe mbada yemasvingo kana usingazive mutemo nyarara.E.D anogonzi atya iye apindura mapepa ecourt?Haana kutaura izvi parally ka.Akatozvipi9ndura pamapepa ecourt acho saka hapana chauri kuti atya apa.Iwe ndiwe wakadhakwa hauzivi zvauri kuita.The writer of the article is commentying on E.D’s response to the application at court saka waida kuti asapindure mapepa here nhai diofo iwe?

Comments are closed.