High Court to hand down judgement on CCC MPs' challenge against ballot removal

The High Court has reserved its judgement in a matter Citizens Coalition for Change self-imposed secretary general Sengezo Tshabangu is seeking to block recalled MPs from contesting under the party during February 3 by-elections.

The judgment will be handed down on Friday.

Tshabangu cited as the second respondent in the application is represented by his lawyer Advocate Lewis Uriri.

CCC was the first applicant while another CCC was cited as a respondent.

Uriri said it is a common cause that vacancies exist as a result of the recalls of 23 respondents by CCC.

He also said the recalled 23 were no longer party members and that it was common cause that they were elected on August 23 under the Nelson Chamisa-led CCC.

He said CCC, the first applicant contends that Chamisa is its president and uses his face as its party's symbol.

Uriri said the 23 respondents accepted their recall because they filed new nomination papers confirming that they were no longer MPs in the party having been recalled by Nelson Chamisa's CCC.

"Having been recalled by CCC they cannot come back as CCC.

"They will contend that there are two CCCS with different constitutions.  That does not deter us.

"If they contend there is a different CCC they must prove that it existed before August 23," said Uriri.

Uriri said the Constitution submitted by Obey Shava representing CCC cited as the opposition is not dated confirming that it was not there when elections were held.

"You don't have two entities called CCC in parliament. We contend there is only one CCC which participated during the elections, sponsored recalled the respondents.

"It would be absurd to have a ballot paper that constitutes two parties with the same identity. It can't. You can only have one identity number," he said.

Uriri also said Justice Munamato Mutevedzi has already made a judgement on similar arguments and that judgement is still extant.

Tinomuda Chinyoka representing the Zanu-PF member who is challenging Amos Chibaya said they got a notice of opposition late.

He said when a person is clutching at straws to argue it takes them a while as happened in this case.

He said his client is a holder of the right to vote and according to a judicial statement of that right, the process should be within the law.

"Candidature of the MP in Mkoba North (Chibaya) was not in accordance with the law."

He said the nomination officer should not have accepted Chibaya's nomination papers.

"The nomination court sat to choose a candidate to fill a vacancy created by Chibaya and when he went back to file his papers the nomination officer should have had doubts regarding his candidature. It was not proper for him to go back and say I came back to fill the vacancy I created.

He was allowed to participate in an election tainted by allowing someone to participate when they had been recalled."

Charles Kwaramba representing 2nd -23 respondents (the recalled members) said the matter was not urgent. He said Tshabangu knew his applicants had filed nomination papers long back but did not act then.

"By its nature, an urgent court application is a matter which can't wait. This application does not have the time factor for urgency," he said.

He also said no irreparable harm would arise in this harm.

"In the absence of evidence showing irreversible harm the matter is not urgent."

"Nothing has stopped the applicant from putting his people for nomination. Tshabangu is not even a candidate and has not even submitted candidates in some constituencies he intends to bar. That is the reason why the application must be removed from the roll for lack of urgency."

Kwaramba also said there would be no problem if Tshabangu seconds his candidates under the same party because he did the same in August.