Zimbabwe:Supreme Court Judge Defects Against Mugabe
3 June 2013
Spread the love

War is brewing faster in the file and rank of Zimbabwe’s Constitutional Court over a recent judgement instructing President Robert Mugabe to hold elections no later than 31st July 2013, and a judge sitting on the 9 panel quorum that presided over the latter verdict on Friday, has come out into the public slamming his own colleagues.
Two judges Deputy Chief Justice Luke Malaba, and Justice Bharat Patel on Friday had already dissented.

Chief Justice Luke Malaba
Chief Justice Luke Malaba

Justice Luke Malaba was later quoted in public labelling the judgement illogical. His words were nakedly printed expressing extreme displeasure. Justice Malaba said the decision “defied logic” in finding Mugabe was in breach of his constitutional responsibilities although” at the same time authorizing him to continue acting unlawfully” by proclaiming a July date.
“That is a very dangerous principle and has no basis in law. The principle of the rule of law just does not permit such an approach,” said Malaba who is known for previously granting bail to MDC-T supporters controversially accused of murdering Glen View police officer Petros Mutedza in 2011.
Malaba’s words came after the 9 member panel in Zimbabwe’s highest court ruled that Robert Mugabe and his  government must conduct elections before the 31st July 2013 failure which they would be in breach of the constitution.
But how can such a decision be reached while at the same time the Supreme Court is ruling that Mugabe is in breach of his constitutional responsibilities, Justice Malaba questioned.
Malaba said that Zimbabwe’s elections can be held even four months later after the dissolution of parliament during a time when also the electorate are being prepared before voting so that they can have a meaningful contribution to the electoral process.
It is illogical to conduct elections soon after dissolution and in the time frame now given, as this would affect the electorates’ constitutional rights, contented Malaba.
Malaba went ahead to state in proverbial language openly ridiculing the decision by saying that he cannot be fooled by it.
“I …refuse to have wool cast over the inner eye of my mind on this matter,” said Malaba.
Malaba’s statements come after Zimbabwe’s judiciary was slammed for being allegedly controlled by the presidency, something which the country’s Justice Minister, Patrick Chinamasa denies. Chinamasa told ZimEye recently that all such allegations are “damn lies,” and should be dismissed with contempt.
 

4 Replies to “Zimbabwe:Supreme Court Judge Defects Against Mugabe”

  1. 9 to o decision by supreme court is the same as a 7 to 2 decision or 5 to 4 decision. Its a majority rules decision. In the USA decisions of 5 to 4 are the standard.

  2. The difference lies in the implementation of the agreed reforms. Why are zanupf afraid if they know they will win the elections? Even the current Lancaster constitution dictates a 30 day period after the dissolution of parliament thereafter there has to be voter registration and education. None of latter has commenced making the process unfeasible. Zanupf is grandstanding and they are not even prepared considering that their structures are in shambles.

  3. I do not believe that delaying elections now will make any difference to the outcome of the forthcoming ballot.

  4. The ruling by the supreme court is clearly stage managed ruling by those corruptly benefitting from Zanu Pf underground schemes. Hats off for Justice Malaba.

Comments are closed.