News / National
Sibanda challenges Constitution Amendment No. 3 in ConCourt
2 hrs ago |
104 Views
Former Binga North legislator and lawyer Prince Dubeko Sibanda has filed an application in the Constitutional Court seeking to have key provisions of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No. 3) Act declared unconstitutional.
In the application, filed against Parliament, President Emmerson Mnangagwa and the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Sibanda argues that provisions extending the terms of office of the incumbent President, Parliament and local authorities from five to seven years violate Section 328(7) of the Constitution.
The application, brought in terms of Section 167(2)(d) of the Constitution, asks the Constitutional Court to declare Sections 5(b) and 10(b) of Amendment No. 3 unconstitutional and invalid, arguing that they confer an unlawful incumbency benefit.
According to Sibanda, while Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, that power is limited by Section 328(7), which prohibits constitutional amendments that extend the term of office of an incumbent President or Parliament.
"This application is directed at the constitutional competence of an amendment that seeks to confer an incumbency benefit in the teeth of Section 328(7)," Sibanda states in his founding affidavit.
He told the court that a previous legal challenge had been struck off because the disputed provisions were still contained in a Bill. However, he argues that the matter is now ripe for determination following the enactment of Constitution Amendment No. 3.
The amendment, which was recently signed into law by President Mnangagwa, extends the terms of office of the President, Members of Parliament and local authority representatives from five to seven years. It also introduces changes to the election of the President under specified circumstances, the composition of the Senate and other aspects of Zimbabwe's electoral framework.
Sibanda is seeking an order declaring the impugned provisions unconstitutional and of no force or effect.
If admitted and heard on the merits, the case is expected to test the constitutional limits of Parliament's power to amend Zimbabwe's Constitution, particularly where such amendments affect the tenure of incumbent office holders.
Neither the respondents nor Government had publicly filed their responses to the application at the time of publication.
In the application, filed against Parliament, President Emmerson Mnangagwa and the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, Sibanda argues that provisions extending the terms of office of the incumbent President, Parliament and local authorities from five to seven years violate Section 328(7) of the Constitution.
The application, brought in terms of Section 167(2)(d) of the Constitution, asks the Constitutional Court to declare Sections 5(b) and 10(b) of Amendment No. 3 unconstitutional and invalid, arguing that they confer an unlawful incumbency benefit.
According to Sibanda, while Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, that power is limited by Section 328(7), which prohibits constitutional amendments that extend the term of office of an incumbent President or Parliament.
"This application is directed at the constitutional competence of an amendment that seeks to confer an incumbency benefit in the teeth of Section 328(7)," Sibanda states in his founding affidavit.
He told the court that a previous legal challenge had been struck off because the disputed provisions were still contained in a Bill. However, he argues that the matter is now ripe for determination following the enactment of Constitution Amendment No. 3.
The amendment, which was recently signed into law by President Mnangagwa, extends the terms of office of the President, Members of Parliament and local authority representatives from five to seven years. It also introduces changes to the election of the President under specified circumstances, the composition of the Senate and other aspects of Zimbabwe's electoral framework.
Sibanda is seeking an order declaring the impugned provisions unconstitutional and of no force or effect.
If admitted and heard on the merits, the case is expected to test the constitutional limits of Parliament's power to amend Zimbabwe's Constitution, particularly where such amendments affect the tenure of incumbent office holders.
Neither the respondents nor Government had publicly filed their responses to the application at the time of publication.
Source - newsday
Join the discussion
Loading comments…
