News / National
Mutasa, Mliswa cry foul over lost seats
27 Mar 2015 at 07:52hrs | Views
Former Zanu-PF secretary for administration Didymus Mutasa and his nephew Temba Mliswa have argued that National Assembly Speaker Advocate Jacob Mudenda erred in declaring their parliamentary seats vacant without establishing the legal validity of the duo's expulsion from the ruling party.
In the heads of argument filed on Tuesday at the Constitutional Court ahead of the April 1 hearing, Mutasa and Mliswa said Adv Mudenda rubber-stamped the position of Zanu-PF without satisfying himself that the expulsion was indeed valid.
Mutasa and Mliswa lost the Headlands and Hurungwe West constituencies respectively after their dismissal from Zanu-PF.
They were expelled from the ruling party a month ago for continuing to undermine the revolutionary party and its leadership despite several warnings to desist from doing so.
Professor Lovemore Madhuku, Tafadzwa Mugabe and Phillip Nyakutombwa of Nyakutombwa, Mugabe Legal Counsel are representing the two politicians while Mr Terrence Hussein is acting for President Mugabe.
Simplisius Chihambakwe is representing the Parliament of Zimbabwe. Mliswa and Mutasa argued that Section 129(1) (k) which was invoked to fire them requires the Speaker to establish whether the notice from the political party was bona fide and whether they had lawfully ceased to be party members.
They argued that the two requirements were not met.
In the heads of argument filed on Tuesday at the Constitutional Court ahead of the April 1 hearing, Mutasa and Mliswa said Adv Mudenda rubber-stamped the position of Zanu-PF without satisfying himself that the expulsion was indeed valid.
Mutasa and Mliswa lost the Headlands and Hurungwe West constituencies respectively after their dismissal from Zanu-PF.
Professor Lovemore Madhuku, Tafadzwa Mugabe and Phillip Nyakutombwa of Nyakutombwa, Mugabe Legal Counsel are representing the two politicians while Mr Terrence Hussein is acting for President Mugabe.
Simplisius Chihambakwe is representing the Parliament of Zimbabwe. Mliswa and Mutasa argued that Section 129(1) (k) which was invoked to fire them requires the Speaker to establish whether the notice from the political party was bona fide and whether they had lawfully ceased to be party members.
They argued that the two requirements were not met.
Source - The Herald