Harare – South Africa based Zimbabwean businessman Mutumwa Mawere has dragged President Emmerson Mnangagwa to the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) seeking an order to cancel the Zanu-PF’s leader’s presidential candidature ahead of elections next month.
Mawere believes that Mnangagwa played a significant role in the hostile takeover of Shabanie Mashaba Mines (SMM) Holdings through the Reconstruction of State-Indebted Insolvent Companies Act, blamed by many for destroying several companies.
The late former president Robert Mugabe’s administration took over SMM management through the Reconstruction of State-Indebted Insolvent Companies Act and appointed an administrator, Arafas Gwaradzimba.
Mawere, this week, filed an application, case number CCZ 27/22, along with SMM Holdings Limited, THZ Holdings Limited, Africa Resources Limited, TAP Building Products Limited, Tichaona Mupasiri who are second to sixth applicants respectively, seeking an order to interdict Mnangagwa from contesting in the presidential election to be held on the 23rd of August this year.
Mnangagwa is the respondent.
The applicants also argue that Mnangagwa erred when he appointed former Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa as the chairman of Air Zimbabwe.
Mawere and others are praying that the “respondent (Mnangagwa) be interdicted and restrained from participating in the 2023 elections pending the resolution of part B of this application.”
Further reads the application: “Court to declare that Mnangagwa’s conduct in relation to the affairs of Air Zimbabwe Private Limited and Hwange Colliery Company (Hwange) through his direct and personal actions including appointing Chinamasa as Chairman of Air Zimbabwe under reconstruction which conduct was ultra vires the Reconstruction of State-Indebted Insolvent Companies Act (Recon Act) which act precluded the concurrent application of the provisions of the Companies Act, a law of general application) in relation to the affairs of a company whose control and management was divested and deprived pursuant to the Recon Act.”
They want the court to determine and declare the following:
“(a) The Reconstruction Act offended Zimbabwean public policy and international law.
“(b) That the Constitutional Court lacked title to hear and assert any rights acquired pursuant to the Reconstruction Act;
“(c) Any law, practice, custom and conduct that offends s. 2(1) of the Constitution is void ab initio;
“(d) That the Reconstruction law being the basis on which the Respondent was constructively and intentionally involved in its conception and prosecution as stated on paragraphs 71 and 72 of the Respondent’s affidavit in opposition to Tichaona Mupasin’s application in terms of s. 167(2)(d) as read with s. 167(3) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe under Case Number CCZ 34/21 in which he stated without providing facts and circumstances of his personal involvement and interest in the affairs of SMM and myself in the matter, was constitutionally invalid and unlawful and as such his conduct fell within the ambit of conduct falling within the ambit of s. 2(1) of the Constitution.”
Source: Nehanda Radio
