Professor Welshman Ncube biting the hand that fed him?

HIGH COURT YET TO DECIDE WHICH IS THE LAWFUL CCC IN HCH 6872/23: ONE WHOSE MAIN DEPONENT IS JAMESON TIMBA OR ONE WHOSE ONLY DEPONENT IS SENGEZO TSHABANGU.

Will the real or lawful CCC please stand up? Not just to pocket the money under the Political Parties (Finance) Act, but for the real deal.

It looks like there are some media houses or political gladiators behind those media houses who - for reasons best known to themselves - are misleading the public by creating the false impression that there are three CCCs [which they are calling factions]; purportedly led by Sengezo Tshabangu, Jameson Timba and Welshman Ncube; respectively.

In a story published yesterday headlined, "Tshabangu, Timba blow as Ncube faction to get political parties finance", ZimLive reported that, "The Citizens Coalition for Change party led by Welshman Ncube will receive funds under the Political Parties (Finance) Act in a major snub to two other factions, it was reported on Sunday... The Standard reports that Tshabangu - perhaps realising Zanu PF will not prop him up this time - made overtures to Ncube about jointly managing the money, which were rejected out of hand."

Apparently ZimLive based its story entirely on the untested initial report published by The Standard also yesterday under the headline "Tshabangu loses battle over govt millions"; which claimed that, "SELF-STYLED Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) secretary general Sengezo Tshabangu is crying foul after rival faction leader Welshman Ncube received a huge windfall under the Political Parties (Finance) Act, The Standard can reveal."

The Standard's alleged revelation was based on unnamed sources who reportedly told the paper that, "Tshabangu was miffed after Ncube allegedly rejected his proposal for the two to become co-signatories of the CCC bank account.  The report says "Ncube yesterday could neither deny nor confirm that the government last week deposited the funds into his party's account; and quotes Ncube as having said: "There is no question about that [not clear what the ‘that' is in reference to] because we are the legitimate CCC…The money is due to CCC and we are CCC entitled to the fund in terms of the law."

The CCC matter has been in court since October 2023 and it remains in court pending the finalisation and determination of the main and most important case out of all the cases that have come up so far, which is case number HCH 6872/23 whose legal dispute is on which is the real and lawful CCC. The plaintiff in this key case is the CCC which Nelson Chamisa had said he leads until he abandoned and fled it on 25 January 2024; after he lost to Tshabangu all the court cases up to that time, involving the recalls of MPs or Councillors and the by-elections they caused most of which were won by ZanuPF, the last of which was on 3 February 2024.

Even before Chamisa jumped ship, Jameson Timba had assumed the role of being the main deponent on Chamisa's behalf against Tshabangu in court applications in which the CCC that Chamisa claimed to lead was the applicant or the respondent in its legal battle with Tshabangu, the Interim CCC Secretary General, involving the recalls of MPs or Councillors and the by-elections held between 3 October 2023 and 3 February 2024.

In all these cases, the key questions of which is the real or lawful CCC, and whether Tshabangu had the locus standi, the power and authority to institute recalls that triggered the by-elections were not determined, and they are yet to be determined.

The summons case to determine these fundamental questions was filed on 20 October 2023, as per the attached copy of the summons, whose full record is in the link at the bottom of this write-up.

So, the parties to the case are two and their identity is clear: one plaintiff, who is the Chamisa or Timba fronted CCC, and one defendant, who is Sengezo Tshabangu who instituted the recalls that triggered the by-elections that led things to be where they are today.

That's the long and short of it.

There are no three CCC factions in the dispute before the courts, which started on 20 October 2023. For the avoidance of doubt Professor Ncube has never been and is not a party to this critical dispute.

The only court involvement by Professor Ncube in the CCC saga was when he made a joinder application early last month to join an interdict case filed by the Timba fronted CCC against Tshabangu, as the two protagonists that have been fighting in court since October 2023, in which Timba's CCC wanted to block the release of party funds under the Political Parties (Finance) Act, pending the finalisation and determination of HCH 6872/23, whose legal dispute is on which is the real and law CCC.

Again, Professor Ncube is not a party to this important summons case which was filed over a year ago; during which period he did not file a joinder application to be part of the case or protect or defend any interest.

Hence, the answer to the question of how many CCCs or CCC factions are in court fighting over the legal matter of which one is the lawful CCC is a no brainer, it is in the public domain: there are only two CCCs at loggerheads: the CCC which Chamisa claimed to be leading before he abandoned it and fled, which is now fronted by Timba; and the CCC whose only deponent has all long been Tshabangu; as is clear not only from the court record but also on the attached summons, and the link below.

As such, whether there's a faction of the "The Citizens Coalition for Change party led by Welshman Ncube", which has or will receive funds due to CCC under the Political Parties (Finance) Act, in light of its representation in the National Assembly, is both a factual and legal matter.

Neither ZimLive nor the Standard newspaper established that, as a matter of fact, the funds in question have actually been or will in fact be given to Professor Ncube's so-called faction.

Also, neither of the two media houses established that the co-signing arrangement they say was rubbished by Professor Ncube would, if it should become an issue, depend on the personal fancies of either Ncube or Tshabangu or it would in fact be a necessary and unavoidable check and balance mechanism required by the relevant authorities, for accountability reasons, pending finalisation of the as yet unresolved legal issues.

Given the controversies that have surrounded the CCC saga, and the fact that there are still important pending legal issues to be resolved in the main summons case, HCH 6872/23, it is important for the relevant authorities not to allow this matter to be clouded and confused by media speculation, rumours and gossip.

The relevant authorities should be on top and at the forefront of all factual communication on this matter. Allowing it to be turned into a scrappy social political football game is not in the national interest.

While the ZimLive and the Standard newspaper say a lot about what was allegedly told to them by unnamed sources, they say nothing about the legal issues involved in this matter.

For example, whether he is a leader of a CCC faction or not, does Professor Ncube himself have locus standi in this matter, to claim the funds in question on his behalf or on behalf of anyone else, whether a CCC faction or whatever?

Would Professor Ncube be there and would he have whatever role in the whole matter but for the recalls and by-elections triggered by Tshabangu? Is Professor Ncube not biting the hand that fed him the opportunity to be Acting CCC President?

Does Professor Ncube not owe Tshabangu a debt of gratitude for the position he says he's holding, whose power he is said to be now using against Tshabangu? Is it not rich to claim that the position is an expression of the Gweru 2019 Congress, when in fact Chamisa had succeeded to throw the out of the Gweru 2019 Congress into the dustbin, until Tshabangu successfully challenged him?

 Would Professor Ncube be doing what he is reported to be doing, had Nelson Chamisa not quit on 25 January 2024 under unrelenting pressure from litigation prosecuted by Tshabangu?

Going by the ZimLive and the Standard newspaper reports, exactly, what beef does Professor Ncube have with Tshabangu? Is it about money or is it about real politics to benefit the public? And, is it about CCC or it is now about personalities and egotrips?

In any event, regarding Professor Ncube's locus standi in this saga, it is common cause that an affidavit submitted by Tshabangu in opposition to Professor Ncube's joinder application, to which Professor Ncube did not reply, in the recent case HCH 4235/24 last month makes serious averments, supported by a compelling legal opinion, that even if one goes by Professor Ncube's own version of whatever CCC faction he leads and how he came to lead it, his term of office has expired.

If this indeed so, as it appears to be, on what legal basis under the Political Parties (Finance) Act, or any under any other law, have the relevant authorities decided to give Professor Ncube the funds that are due to the lawful CCC, if they have in fact done so as reported by the cited media; a matter which the courts are yet to decide, and whose legal dispute does not involve Professor Ncube in any way, shape or form?

But there is a more fundamental issue, which should exercise the mind of the authorities and anyone else genuinely interested in this matter.

If the court should find and determine in the pending summons case HCH 6872/23, whose legal dispute is on which is the real and lawful CCC, that Tshabangu had no locus standi, no power and no authority to institute the recalls of CCC MPs and Councillors who were affected; it would then follow that the recalls were therefore legal nullities ab initio, and that the by-elections based on those recalls were ipso facto unlawful, and that therefore the recalls and the by-elections they triggered should be set aside; and further that the CCC MPs and Councillors who were recalled should be reinstated.

This scenario would not only put paid to Tshabangu, who would have lost the main final case, but it would also put paid to Professor Ncube and whoever else is in his so-called faction. And moreover, it would put paid to the winners of the by-elections that were triggered by the recalls, and would give the MPs and Councillors who were recalled the last laugh.

Of course, Tshabangu would most certainly appeal, and the affected MPs and Councillors would fall on other to help Tshabangu to prosecute that appeal.  Even Professor Ncube would support Tshabangu's appeal.  

This is a staggering thought, which is a real risk and possibility. People are jumping up and down, all over the place; blissfully unaware of this risk and possibility and what would be its consequences!

So, what is the fuss all about? Mind boggling!