News / National
Mutasa, Mliswa have no place in Zanu-PF
19 Mar 2015 at 07:47hrs | Views
Expelled Zanu-PF Politburo members, Messrs Didymus Mutasa and Rugare Gumbo have no place in the revolutionary party that they have vilified and showed so much disdain for, the revolutionary party said yesterday.
Mr Mutasa, a former party secretary for Administration and Mr Gumbo, former secretary for Information and Publicity are challenging the constitutionality of the December 6 National People's Congress, which the duo contend breached the Zanu-PF constitution.
In court papers submitted at the High Court last week, Mr Mutasa described Zanu-PF party as "a monstrous organisation that has no respect of rules, values and principles".
But in his opposing papers filed at the High Court yesterday, Zanu-PF Second Secretary and Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa, said the party was a voluntary organisation and Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo's revulsion at it clearly showed that they could not fit in it.
"With such views, there is clearly no space for them within the organisation," said VP Mnangagwa.
"It appears the only intention in filing this application is not to seek redress, but to destroy the first respondent (Zanu-PF)."
VP Mnangagwa, who raised several preliminary points to convince the court to dismiss the duo's case without going into the argument on merits, questioned how a congress the two actively organised and should have participated in suddenly became an unlawful meeting.
Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo, he said, were willing participants to the preparation and organisation of the congress and amendments to the party's constitution they now sought to impugn.
"They also accepted and endorsed the dismissals and votes of no confidence in numerous senior and other office bearers in first respondent (Zanu-PF)," said VP Mnangagwa.
"Given their participation and endorsement of processes that took place within the party, the applicants clearly waived their rights to challenge the very circumstances they had created and acquiesced to.
"They should therefore be stopped from challenging the outcome, which they only now seem to have problems with."
VP Mnangagwa also said the duo were no longer members of Zanu-PF after they were stripped of their rights to belong to the party in terms of clause 17 of the party's former constitution or clause 20 of the new one.
He said before seeking the court's intervention, the two should have used internal remedies of the party such as appealing to the Central Committee.
"The Central Committee was never petitioned to deal with the so-called constitutional breaches," said VP Mnangagwa.
"If the court were to determine this matter, it would be taking away the Central Committee's powers, which as per the first respondent's constitution, is the final arbiter�?"
VP Mnangagwa further averred that the two's application did not comply with the rules in form and content because it did not clearly show the cause of action or the procedure adopted in approaching the court. "The application presented before this court can, with all due respect, be loosely referred to as a court application. It is incoherent, rambling and in many instances defamatory of persons who are not cited in this application."
He said Mr Gumbo's affidavit added no value to the duo's application as it was premised on spurious attack on persons who were deliberately not cited in the application.
"The action taken by the first respondent were well within its constitution and second respondent (President Mugabe) at no relevant time sought to challenge these actions within the party," said VP Mnangagwa.
He also urged the court to reject the duo's application for condonation for filing the application out of time.
Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo lodged the 344-page court application arguing that the December 2014 congress was a nullity and that it was held in breach of the party's constitution.
They also seek the nullification of amendments to the party's constitution made and adopted at the congress and a declaration that subsequent party elections or appointments made in terms of the amended constitution were illegal.
Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo argued that all votes of no confidence passed against party structures and individuals between October and December 2014 were inconsistent with Section 68 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
The two said the removal of some party members from the Zanu-PF Central Committee and any denial of others to contest for the same positions, was in breach of both the Zanu-PF party constitution and the national Constitution.
They said failure by Zanu-PF to hold elections for the positions of Vice President, second secretaries and the national chairperson was unlawful and in violation of Zanu-PF's constitution and that the Congress was not free and fair.
Zanu-PF, President Mugabe and Simon Khaya-Moyo (former party national chairman), who are represented by Mr Terence Hussein of Hussein, Ranchhod and Company, were cited respondents in the application.
Mr Mutasa, a former party secretary for Administration and Mr Gumbo, former secretary for Information and Publicity are challenging the constitutionality of the December 6 National People's Congress, which the duo contend breached the Zanu-PF constitution.
In court papers submitted at the High Court last week, Mr Mutasa described Zanu-PF party as "a monstrous organisation that has no respect of rules, values and principles".
But in his opposing papers filed at the High Court yesterday, Zanu-PF Second Secretary and Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa, said the party was a voluntary organisation and Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo's revulsion at it clearly showed that they could not fit in it.
"With such views, there is clearly no space for them within the organisation," said VP Mnangagwa.
"It appears the only intention in filing this application is not to seek redress, but to destroy the first respondent (Zanu-PF)."
VP Mnangagwa, who raised several preliminary points to convince the court to dismiss the duo's case without going into the argument on merits, questioned how a congress the two actively organised and should have participated in suddenly became an unlawful meeting.
Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo, he said, were willing participants to the preparation and organisation of the congress and amendments to the party's constitution they now sought to impugn.
"They also accepted and endorsed the dismissals and votes of no confidence in numerous senior and other office bearers in first respondent (Zanu-PF)," said VP Mnangagwa.
"Given their participation and endorsement of processes that took place within the party, the applicants clearly waived their rights to challenge the very circumstances they had created and acquiesced to.
"They should therefore be stopped from challenging the outcome, which they only now seem to have problems with."
VP Mnangagwa also said the duo were no longer members of Zanu-PF after they were stripped of their rights to belong to the party in terms of clause 17 of the party's former constitution or clause 20 of the new one.
He said before seeking the court's intervention, the two should have used internal remedies of the party such as appealing to the Central Committee.
"The Central Committee was never petitioned to deal with the so-called constitutional breaches," said VP Mnangagwa.
"If the court were to determine this matter, it would be taking away the Central Committee's powers, which as per the first respondent's constitution, is the final arbiter�?"
VP Mnangagwa further averred that the two's application did not comply with the rules in form and content because it did not clearly show the cause of action or the procedure adopted in approaching the court. "The application presented before this court can, with all due respect, be loosely referred to as a court application. It is incoherent, rambling and in many instances defamatory of persons who are not cited in this application."
He said Mr Gumbo's affidavit added no value to the duo's application as it was premised on spurious attack on persons who were deliberately not cited in the application.
"The action taken by the first respondent were well within its constitution and second respondent (President Mugabe) at no relevant time sought to challenge these actions within the party," said VP Mnangagwa.
He also urged the court to reject the duo's application for condonation for filing the application out of time.
Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo lodged the 344-page court application arguing that the December 2014 congress was a nullity and that it was held in breach of the party's constitution.
They also seek the nullification of amendments to the party's constitution made and adopted at the congress and a declaration that subsequent party elections or appointments made in terms of the amended constitution were illegal.
Messrs Mutasa and Gumbo argued that all votes of no confidence passed against party structures and individuals between October and December 2014 were inconsistent with Section 68 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
The two said the removal of some party members from the Zanu-PF Central Committee and any denial of others to contest for the same positions, was in breach of both the Zanu-PF party constitution and the national Constitution.
They said failure by Zanu-PF to hold elections for the positions of Vice President, second secretaries and the national chairperson was unlawful and in violation of Zanu-PF's constitution and that the Congress was not free and fair.
Zanu-PF, President Mugabe and Simon Khaya-Moyo (former party national chairman), who are represented by Mr Terence Hussein of Hussein, Ranchhod and Company, were cited respondents in the application.
Source - herald
