Africa-Press – Zimbabwe. Seventeen (17) Supreme Court and Constitutional Court judges Friday made an appeal against a High Court ruling that nullified the extension of Chief Justice Luke Malaba’s term of office. The appeal, at the Supreme Court, disqualifies the same judges from hearing their own matter. Pindula News presents below the list of the 17 judges that made the appeal.
They argue that the High Court had no power, authority or jurisdiction to set aside or otherwise curtail or challenge the exercise of either legislative power or executive authority by the Legislature and the Presidency respectively in the circumstances, and
3.5. The Court a quo does not have the jurisdiction to issue a determination whose effect is to impugn the conduct of the Parliament and or the President of Zimbabwe.
4. The Court a quo erred at law in failing to uphold the objection in limine to the effect that since no leave had been obtained by the 1st Respondent to sue the 2nd to 18th Appellants in the Court a quo the 1st Respondent was not property before the Court aquo and in so doing the Court aquo failed to give effect to the bar operating against the 1st Respondent arising from the peremptory provisions of Rule 18 of the High Court Rules.
5 The Court a quo erred and misdirected itself at law in failing to find, as it should have, that the tenure of the 1st Appellant as a Judge of the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe and as the Honorable Chief Justice of Zimbabwe had not reached the maximum 15 year period allowed by Section 186(2) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe and therefore had not been extended by virtue of the Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment No.2 Act 2021.
6. The Court a quo erred and misdirected itself at law in failing to find, as it should have, that the continuation in office of the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice and Judges of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts beyond the age of 70 years was lawful and did not amount to an extension of the term of office, and consequently did not trigger the operation of Section 328(7) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.
7. The Court a quo erred and misdirected itself at law on finding that the Appellant ceased to be Chief Justice of the Republic of Zimbabwe on 15 May 2021 at 00 00 hours on the circumstances of the case and more particularly when on the facts, the 2nd Appellant had lawfully elected to continue as Honorable Chief Justice of Zimbabwe and the President of Zimbabwe had accepted the said election as provided for by section 188 (1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe as Amended by Constitution of Zimbabwe Amendment (No 2) Act 2021.
More: Pindula News
