The law firm of choice for internationally focused companies

+263 242 744 677

admin@tsazim.com

4 Gunhill Avenue,

Harare, Zimbabwe

Residents seek urgent order to decentralise Constitutional Amendment hearings

In
two
urgent
applications
filed
at
the
Harare
and
Masvingo
High
Courts
on
23
and
24
March
respectively,
the
residents
contend
that
the
scheduled
hearings,
set
to
run
from
30
March
to
2
April,
are
overly
centralised
and
inaccessible
to
many
citizens,
particularly
those
in
remote
areas.

Represented
by
Zimbabwe
Lawyers
for
Human
Rights
(ZLHR),
the
applicants
argue
that
holding
hearings
at
selected
district
centres,
rather
than
across
wards,
will
effectively
disenfranchise
large
segments
of
the
population.

“Some
residents
in
various
provinces
have
asked
Parliament
to
decentralise
public
hearings

to
avoid
disenfranchising
people
from
participating
and
contributing
in
the
crucial
consultations
on
the
proposed
Bill,”
ZLHR
said.

The
residents
argue
that
the
choice
of
venues,
including
Hwedza
Centre,
places
an
unfair
burden
on
citizens
who
would
be
required
to
travel
long
distances,
often
on
foot
or
using
limited
and
costly
public
transport.

They
further
submit
that
Parliament
has
not
made
provisions
to
assist
vulnerable
and
indigent
citizens
with
transport,
despite
its
constitutional
obligation
under
Section
328(4)
to
ensure
public
participation
by
providing
the
necessary
facilities.

The
applicants
are
seeking
an
order
compelling
Parliament,
represented
by
Speaker
of
the
National
Assembly
Jacob
Mudenda
and
President
of
the
Senate
Mabel
Chinomona,
to
conduct
the
hearings
in
a
manner
that
fully
complies
with
constitutional
requirements.

The
respondents
in
the
matter
include
the
Minister
of
Justice,
Legal
and
Parliamentary
Affairs,
Ziyambi
Ziyambi,
and
President
Emmerson
Mnangagwa.

The
applicants
argue
that
meaningful
public
participation
is
central
to
safeguarding
the
Constitution
and
that
citizens
must
be
given
a
fair
and
adequate
opportunity
to
contribute
to
discussions
on
proposed
amendments.

They
also
cite
their
constitutional
right
to
freedom
of
expression,
insisting
that
they
must
be
afforded
a
genuine
platform
to
voice
their
views
on
matters
of
national
importance.

In
addition,
the
applicants
are
asking
the
court
to
direct
the
authorities
to
provide
transport
for
affected
communities.
Some
are
also
seeking
an
interdict
to
prevent
the
hearings
from
proceeding
under
the
current
arrangements.