Opinion / Columnist
Chief Justice Luke Malaba: Where is the full judgment to Chamisa's election challenge?
07 Nov 2018 at 07:12hrs | Views
The Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe, led by Chief Justice Luke Malaba, is yet to deliver full judgment in Advocate Nelson Chamisa's elections petition,it has emerged. This comes almost three (3) months after the apex court heard the matter in front of millions of Zimbabweans locally and abroad.
When asked to comment on the Constitutional Court proceedings, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) responded, through its Africa Programme Director Arnold Tsunga, "We are aware that the African Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF) issued an exit statement that focused on procedural aspects of the case and not the substance of the outcome.
The fact that the case was held in open court and parties to the dispute given equal time to present their cases and that the decision was handed in open court and within the timelines provided for by the law is the reason why the AJJF possibly came out that way on exit.
However since the court did not hand the full judgment with reasons it is better to wait for the full judgment and reasons for such judgment before we comment on substantive aspects of the judgment. At this stage we were surprised by the order of costs against the litigant as that is not normally done in matters where the application is not frivolous and involves a significant public interest issues as this one did."
In Zimbabwe, the Courts can go for several months, if not years, without handing full judgment in a case. It still remains to be seen how long it will take Zimbabwe's apex Court to deliver full judgment with reasons in this much publicised electoral challenge.
Walter Nyabadza is a Zimbabwean lawyer and legal advisor for the National Reclamation Assembly. He writes in his personal capacity and can be contacted on 0771 725 704 or nyabadzawalter@yahoo.com
When asked to comment on the Constitutional Court proceedings, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) responded, through its Africa Programme Director Arnold Tsunga, "We are aware that the African Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF) issued an exit statement that focused on procedural aspects of the case and not the substance of the outcome.
The fact that the case was held in open court and parties to the dispute given equal time to present their cases and that the decision was handed in open court and within the timelines provided for by the law is the reason why the AJJF possibly came out that way on exit.
However since the court did not hand the full judgment with reasons it is better to wait for the full judgment and reasons for such judgment before we comment on substantive aspects of the judgment. At this stage we were surprised by the order of costs against the litigant as that is not normally done in matters where the application is not frivolous and involves a significant public interest issues as this one did."
In Zimbabwe, the Courts can go for several months, if not years, without handing full judgment in a case. It still remains to be seen how long it will take Zimbabwe's apex Court to deliver full judgment with reasons in this much publicised electoral challenge.
Walter Nyabadza is a Zimbabwean lawyer and legal advisor for the National Reclamation Assembly. He writes in his personal capacity and can be contacted on 0771 725 704 or nyabadzawalter@yahoo.com
Source - Walter Nyabadza
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
