Tinashe Sambiri| The Constitutional Court sidestepped a decisive ruling on the contentious Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 on Wednesday, dismissing two separate challenges without touching the substance of the Bill.
Both the war veterans’ application, argued by constitutional lawyer Lovemore Madhuku, and a parallel case filed by former Binga North MP Prince Dubeko Sibanda were thrown out on procedural grounds.
The apex court ruled on 17 June that the war veterans’ bid to strike down CAB3 failed to clear the bar for direct ConCourt intervention. The bench said the matter “failed to meet the legal requirements necessary” for it to be heard at that level.
The veterans had contended that CAB3 was unconstitutional and aimed at gutting key protections in the supreme law. But the court refused to engage those claims.
Sibanda’s challenge met the same fate. Judges held that his case was “brought prematurely” and should start in a lower court.
Speaking after the twin dismissals, Madhuku said the court avoided the core issues entirely. “The Constitutional Court has said that although the President has the duties that we had indicated in the application, those duties are not specific enough to allow the Constitutional Court to exercise its exclusive jurisdiction,” he explained.
He added that the ruling forces applicants to begin again: “What this means is that the application ought to be lodged in a lower court, such as the High Court. The High Court can determine those issues, and then it goes up to the Constitutional Court through the normal processes of appeals and so forth.”
Critics argue the decision effectively shields CAB3 from immediate constitutional scrutiny, delaying any reckoning over amendments that opponents say concentrate power and erode democratic checks. By invoking technical thresholds, the ConCourt left unresolved the question of whether the Bill itself violates the Constitution.
The judgment sends both challenges back to square one, meaning CAB3 continues its path through Parliament while legal opposition faces a longer, costlier route through the lower courts.
ZimEye is a spread out media-network market of professionals in various fields that include arts & journalism as practiced by many of its subscribers scattered across the globe. The objective is to expose at close range facts, myths, commentaries, and news-centric developments on Zimbabwe and Africa at large.
© Copyright 2024 – ZimEye.net | ZimEye.org | ZimEye.com – Privacy Policy
