News / National
Mawarire hits a brick wall
17 Jun 2017 at 10:01hrs | Views
The application by #ThisFlag campaign leader Evan Mawarire accused of subverting a constitutionally-elected Government or alternatively inciting public violence to have his matter referred to Constitutional Court yesterday hit a brick wall.
In his application, Mawarire through his lawyer Mr Harrison Nkomo, argued that the section he is being charged under had not been subjected to Constitutional scrutiny.
He also argued that his constitutional rights as enshrined in the new Constitution were being infringed.
In that view, he wanted the magistrate to refer the case to the Concourt for analysis.
As a mandatory procedure to such applications, Mr Nkomo intended to take his client to the witness stand to give factual evidence to the enquiry, but he later abandoned the procedure.
This was after prosecutor Mr Michael Reza had opposed Mr Nkomo's intentions and sought for a postponement of the matter so that the enquiry can properly be conducted.
In her ruling, magistrate Ms Barbra Chimboza, ruled that Mawarire's application was frivolous and vexatious.
"Both the State and the defence were aware that it is mandatory to hold the enquiry so that the court can make a factual assessment of what constitutional rights were infringed," she said.
In his application, Mawarire through his lawyer Mr Harrison Nkomo, argued that the section he is being charged under had not been subjected to Constitutional scrutiny.
He also argued that his constitutional rights as enshrined in the new Constitution were being infringed.
In that view, he wanted the magistrate to refer the case to the Concourt for analysis.
This was after prosecutor Mr Michael Reza had opposed Mr Nkomo's intentions and sought for a postponement of the matter so that the enquiry can properly be conducted.
In her ruling, magistrate Ms Barbra Chimboza, ruled that Mawarire's application was frivolous and vexatious.
"Both the State and the defence were aware that it is mandatory to hold the enquiry so that the court can make a factual assessment of what constitutional rights were infringed," she said.
Source - the herald