News / National
Chimombe, Mpofu approach ConCourt
10 Oct 2024 at 07:40hrs | Views
FRAUD-accused businessmen Mike Chimombe and Moses Mpofu have filed their application for referral to the Constitutional Court to determine their claim of violation of their rights by being tried by a High Court panel with assessors over the age of 70.
The business partners are accused of fraud involving over US$7 million in state funds under a botched Government goats-supply tender. Their trial last week was stalled after the two raised constitutional questions which they seek to be determined by the Constitutional Court. They seek to refer to the Constitutional Court the question of whether it is legal to have assessors aged over 70 sit with a judge in a trial.
It is their contention that by not providing for a maximum age limit of 70 for an assessor, the High Court Act is inconsistent with the Constitution which imposes a maximum age limit of 70, now 75, on judges and so, by implication on every other judicial officer sitting as a member of the High Court.
In criminal cases tried in the High Court, a judge sits with two assessors and while the judge decides questions of law alone, on questions of fact the court works by majority vote with the three having an equal vote.
The business partners are accused of fraud involving over US$7 million in state funds under a botched Government goats-supply tender. Their trial last week was stalled after the two raised constitutional questions which they seek to be determined by the Constitutional Court. They seek to refer to the Constitutional Court the question of whether it is legal to have assessors aged over 70 sit with a judge in a trial.
It is their contention that by not providing for a maximum age limit of 70 for an assessor, the High Court Act is inconsistent with the Constitution which imposes a maximum age limit of 70, now 75, on judges and so, by implication on every other judicial officer sitting as a member of the High Court.
In criminal cases tried in the High Court, a judge sits with two assessors and while the judge decides questions of law alone, on questions of fact the court works by majority vote with the three having an equal vote.
Source - The Herald
