HARARE, Mar. 26 (NewsDay Live) – President Emmerson Mnangagwa has not filed opposing papers in a Constitutional Court challenge brought by war veterans seeking to block proposed amendments that could extend his tenure by two years.
Attorney-General Virginia Mabhiza, cited as the second respondent, has filed an opposing affidavit. She says she is acting on her own behalf and on behalf of the President, whom she states authorised her to respond because the matter turns on statutory interpretation with no foreseeable disputes of fact.
The applicants—Reuben Zulu, Godfrey Gurira, Shoorai Nyamangodo, Joseph Chinyangare, Digmore Knowledge Ndiya and Joseph Chinguwa—are represented by constitutional lawyer Lovemore Madhuku.
In a replying affidavit, Zulu argues that Mnangagwa’s failure to file papers indicates he is not opposing the relief sought.
“The failure of the first respondent to file an opposing affidavit… means that he is not opposed to the relief sought,” he said.
Zulu contends the President alone must answer such allegations and that the Attorney-General cannot stand in for him.
Keep Reading
- ‘Govt spineless on wetland land barons’
- SA’s search for a fairer electoral system
- SA’s search for a fairer electoral system
- Mawere demands judge’s recusal
“I am advised that the averment by the second respondent that she is also representing the first respondent cannot have the effect of making her opposing affidavit that of the first respondent… the law does not permit her to speak on behalf of the first respondent in an application under section 167(2)(d) of the Constitution.”
He adds that only the President can respond to a claim alleging failure to fulfil constitutional duties, and that this obligation is non-delegable.
“This cannot be delegated to any other State official whatever the circumstances,” Zulu said.
The applicants are asking the court to nullify the proposed amendments, arguing they are unconstitutional and intended to unlawfully extend Mnangagwa’s rule.