In
a
letter
dated
5
March
2026,
Ndlovu
informed
Mr
Sithole
that
he
was
withdrawing
with
immediate
effect
from
representing
the
applicants
in
proceedings
before
the
Constitutional
Court.
The
letter,
written
on
behalf
of
the
Apex
Legal
Group
of
Advocates,
cites
a
breakdown
in
trust,
unpaid
legal
fees,
and
reputational
attacks
linked
to
the
litigation.
The
“Mr
Sithole”
referred
to
in
the
letter
is
Nqobani
Sithole,
a
Zimbabwean
lawyer
who
has
been
representing
Mbuso
Fuzwayo
and
the
organisation
Ibhetshu
LikaZulu
in
the
Constitutional
Court
case
related
to
the
attempt
to
challenge
or
clarify
the
legality
of
extending
President
Emmerson
Mnangagwa’s
term
to
2030.
Ndlovu
states
that
from
the
outset
he
had
warned
both
Mr
Sithole
and
Professor
Jonathan
Moyo,
whom
he
describes
as
the
principal
architect
of
the
case,
that
the
matter
carried
significant
reputational
risks.
Because
of
those
risks,
he
says,
he
required
clear
commitments
and
undertakings
before
agreeing
to
act.
According
to
the
advocate,
those
assurances
were
given
but
were
not
honoured.
He
says
that
after
the
Constitutional
Court
granted
direct
access
in
the
matter,
he
was
informed
that
payment
could
not
be
made,
despite
his
understanding
that
funds
had
already
been
received
in
connection
with
the
case.
The
dispute
appears
to
have
escalated
further
after
public
allegations
were
made
against
him
by
Professor
Moyo.
In
the
letter,
Ndlovu
describes
the
accusations
as
baseless
and
says
they
have
caused
reputational
harm.
He
characterises
the
attacks
as
choreographed
and
says
the
developments
signalled
a
deterioration
in
the
professional
relationship.
“As
a
result,”
he
writes,
“I
cannot
continue
to
serve
in
circumstances
in
which
I
am
treated
as
expendable
or
as
an
instrument
of
convenience.”
The
withdrawal
raises
questions
about
the
future
direction
of
the
Constitutional
Court
case,
which
had
already
drawn
interest
because
of
its
political
implications
and
the
prominent
figures
associated
with
it.
Legal
withdrawals
of
this
nature
are
unusual
in
high
profile
constitutional
litigation,
particularly
after
a
case
has
already
secured
direct
access
to
the
country’s
highest
court
on
constitutional
matters.
Ndlovu
concludes
that
he
is
withdrawing
in
order
to
protect
his
professional
integrity
and
dignity.
The
development
introduces
uncertainty
into
the
proceedings
and
will
force
the
applicants
to
secure
new
legal
representation
at
a
critical
stage
of
the
case.
It
also
highlights
growing
tensions
among
some
of
the
actors
involved
in
politically
sensitive
litigation
in
Zimbabwe,
where
legal
battles
often
intersect
with
wider
political
rivalries
and
public
commentary.
The
case
became
very
controversial
when
certain
people
from
civil
society
supported
it,
whether
knowingly
or
unknowingly,
that
it
was
being
used
toi
open
the
door
for
the
2030
project
to
succeed.
And
now
this
letter
has
opened
a
Pandora’s
box,
making
it
clear
that
the
case
had
actually
been
used
for
that.
Post
published
in:
Featured