News / National
Kasukuwere sued
01 Apr 2016 at 10:18hrs | Views
HARARE and Chitungwiza residents have taken the Minister of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing, Saviour Kasukuwere, to the High Court challenging the constitutionality of his recent revocation of council's decision to employ top banker Mr James Mushore as the new town clerk for Harare.
Former NMBZ chief executive Mr Mushore was employed by council after successfully coming out tops in the highly contested job interview, but found himself jobless a few hours later, after Minister Kasukuwere rescinded the appointment.
Minister Kasukuwere nullified council's decision citing Section 314 of the Urban Councils Act, which empowers him to revoke any council decisions that he feels do not serve the interests of the masses.
To that end, the Combined Harare Residents' Association and the Chitungwiza Residents' Association are now seeking the striking down of Section 314 of the Urban Councils Act together with four others – Sections 132, 133, 134 and 135 of the same law – which they argued to be militating against the spirit of devolution of power and good governance.
The residents listed Minister Kasukuwere, City of Harare and the Attorney-General as respondents in the court application filed yesterday by Mr Tonderai Bhatasara of Mupanga Bhatasara Attorneys.
In the court application, the residents argued that the decision by Minister Kasukuwere was unconstitutional as it had the effect of killing the spirit that gives powers of local governance to the people.
"In terms of Section 264 of the Constitution, the objectives of the devolution of governmental powers and responsibilities to provincial and metropolitan councils and local authorities are – to give powers of local governance to the people and enhance their participation in the exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them, to recognise the right of communities to manage their own affairs and to further their development, to transfer responsibilities and resources from the national government in order to establish a sound financial base for each provincial and metropolitan council and local authority. . ."
The residents argued that Minister Kasukuwere's decision was unlawful and must be nullified.
"I aver that first respondent (Minister Kasukuwere) violated provisions of Chapter 14 of the Constitution which gives second respondent (council) the power and responsibility to manage its affairs in the interest of the residents.
"More significantly, Section 314 is unconstitutional in that it gives the first respondent, a political appointee, unrestricted power to overturn decisions made by another tier of Government. It has to be struck down.
"The provision is too broad and liable to abuse as in this particular instance," reads the application.
The residents argued that the same fate should also visit Sections 132, 133, 134 and 135 of the Urban Councils Act because they are contrary to the spirit and letter of devolution of power and resources to lower tiers of Government as envisaged in Chapter 14 of the Constitution.
They cited Section 135(4) of the Act, which makes any decision or revocations by the minister final, saying it violates the people's right to administrative justice.
"Such a provision purports to oust the jurisdiction of the court to review the decision of the first respondent.
"It is not compatible with Section 68 of the Constitution.
"The applicants, their members and indeed the public are in terms of Section 68 (1) of the Constitution entitled to administrative conduct that is lawful.
"Clearly the administrative action of the first respondent is unlawful, unconstitutional and violates the rights of the applicants, its members and/or the public.
"In his letter, first respondent does not say why it is in the interest of residents of Harare that he rescinds the decision to appoint the town clerk," argued the residents.
It was further argued that Section 135 of the Urban Councils Act infringes on the people's right to equal protection and benefit of the law as specified in Section 56(1) of the Constitution.
Chitungwiza residents also complained of the conduct of the minister saying their interests in the matter aroses from the fact that they received water from Harare and that they were eager to see the proper, efficient and transparent management of the affairs of the capital city.
On March 24 this year, Harare City Council transparently and thoroughly selected and employed Mr Mushore as town clerk, but Minister Kasukuwere rescinded the decision through a letter the same day.
That sparked outrage with the residents challenging the propriety and constitutionality of Minister Kasukuwere's decision.
Minister Kasukuwere, council and the AG are yet to respond to the court application.
Former NMBZ chief executive Mr Mushore was employed by council after successfully coming out tops in the highly contested job interview, but found himself jobless a few hours later, after Minister Kasukuwere rescinded the appointment.
Minister Kasukuwere nullified council's decision citing Section 314 of the Urban Councils Act, which empowers him to revoke any council decisions that he feels do not serve the interests of the masses.
To that end, the Combined Harare Residents' Association and the Chitungwiza Residents' Association are now seeking the striking down of Section 314 of the Urban Councils Act together with four others – Sections 132, 133, 134 and 135 of the same law – which they argued to be militating against the spirit of devolution of power and good governance.
The residents listed Minister Kasukuwere, City of Harare and the Attorney-General as respondents in the court application filed yesterday by Mr Tonderai Bhatasara of Mupanga Bhatasara Attorneys.
In the court application, the residents argued that the decision by Minister Kasukuwere was unconstitutional as it had the effect of killing the spirit that gives powers of local governance to the people.
"In terms of Section 264 of the Constitution, the objectives of the devolution of governmental powers and responsibilities to provincial and metropolitan councils and local authorities are – to give powers of local governance to the people and enhance their participation in the exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them, to recognise the right of communities to manage their own affairs and to further their development, to transfer responsibilities and resources from the national government in order to establish a sound financial base for each provincial and metropolitan council and local authority. . ."
The residents argued that Minister Kasukuwere's decision was unlawful and must be nullified.
"I aver that first respondent (Minister Kasukuwere) violated provisions of Chapter 14 of the Constitution which gives second respondent (council) the power and responsibility to manage its affairs in the interest of the residents.
"More significantly, Section 314 is unconstitutional in that it gives the first respondent, a political appointee, unrestricted power to overturn decisions made by another tier of Government. It has to be struck down.
"The provision is too broad and liable to abuse as in this particular instance," reads the application.
The residents argued that the same fate should also visit Sections 132, 133, 134 and 135 of the Urban Councils Act because they are contrary to the spirit and letter of devolution of power and resources to lower tiers of Government as envisaged in Chapter 14 of the Constitution.
They cited Section 135(4) of the Act, which makes any decision or revocations by the minister final, saying it violates the people's right to administrative justice.
"Such a provision purports to oust the jurisdiction of the court to review the decision of the first respondent.
"It is not compatible with Section 68 of the Constitution.
"The applicants, their members and indeed the public are in terms of Section 68 (1) of the Constitution entitled to administrative conduct that is lawful.
"Clearly the administrative action of the first respondent is unlawful, unconstitutional and violates the rights of the applicants, its members and/or the public.
"In his letter, first respondent does not say why it is in the interest of residents of Harare that he rescinds the decision to appoint the town clerk," argued the residents.
It was further argued that Section 135 of the Urban Councils Act infringes on the people's right to equal protection and benefit of the law as specified in Section 56(1) of the Constitution.
Chitungwiza residents also complained of the conduct of the minister saying their interests in the matter aroses from the fact that they received water from Harare and that they were eager to see the proper, efficient and transparent management of the affairs of the capital city.
On March 24 this year, Harare City Council transparently and thoroughly selected and employed Mr Mushore as town clerk, but Minister Kasukuwere rescinded the decision through a letter the same day.
That sparked outrage with the residents challenging the propriety and constitutionality of Minister Kasukuwere's decision.
Minister Kasukuwere, council and the AG are yet to respond to the court application.
Source - the herald
