The High Court in Harare considers the arguments raised by Temba Mliswa and priest Walter Magaya, the scheduled ZIFA elections on January 25 are cast in a particularly unclear light.
Yesterday, the Bulawayo High Court’s Justice Ngoni Nduna moved Mliswa’s legal challenge to Harare, where it will be combined with Magaya’s motion. The joint hearing is scheduled to be presided over this afternoon by Justice Tawanda Chitapi.
After being disqualified from running in the polls, Mliswa and Magaya have gone to court to try to get their issues handled so they can postpone the process.
“We appeared before Honourable Justice Nduna, who decided the matter should be handled by the same judge addressing the ZIFA case involving Walter Magaya,” Mliswa’s lawyer Musindo Hungwe said after the hearing in Bulawayo, accepting the transfer.
This keeps opinions from being in conflict. Honourable Justice Chitapi’s office in Harare has taken over the hearing, and we should know the time and date of the proceedings there soon.
Due to not meeting ZIFA’s eligibility requirements, four candidates were disqualified from participating in the election: Magaya and Mliswa, as well as Benjani Mwaruwari, Farai Jere, and Gift Banda.
Related Stories
.Magaya Moves to Halt ZIFA Elections in High Court Battle
.ZIFA President to Receive US$50,000 Annual Bonus from CAF
Along with Banda and Mwaruwari, Magaya has also brought the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) to challenge his disqualification due to an O-Level certificate requirement. In contrast, the latest changes to ZIFA are the subject of Mliswa’s complaint, which centres on constitutional issues and procedural flaws.
“Prophet Magaya’s challenge centres on his exclusion from candidature due to ZIFA’s Ethics Committee’s interpretation of eligibility rules,” Hungwe explained, going into further detail about the competing legal theories. In contrast, the ZIFA Statutes 2024 are flawed since our case highlights the need of constitutional conformity.
Despite the fact that their arguments are different, the two candidates are in agreement that the elections should be postponed until these matters are settled. Our position is that it is unfair to conduct elections under a statute that is up for debate.
Mliswa said, “This is a sensible move” in expressing his support for the decision to consolidate the cases. It would be unfortunate if one court could direct the polls to go forward while another could put a stop to them. It would be more efficient for a single judge to preside over all of these connected cases so that the results are clear and consistent.
