Constitutional Court dismissed Saviour Kasukuwere’s application to challenge a Supreme Court ruling which further upheld his suspension to participate in the presidential elections.
The court, presided by Deputy Chief Justice Elizabeth Gwaunza and two other judges, dismissed his application for direct access without costs, saying that it was a disguised appeal and not properly before the court.
The Constitutional Court emphasised that all legal avenues should be exhausted at the Supreme Court before roping in the Constitutional
Tyson approached the Constitutional Court to in a bid to overturn the Supreme Court’s judgment on the basis that it violates his right to equal protection under the law.
The ruling follows a legal challenge launched by ZANU PF activist Lovedale Mangwana against Kasukuwere.
These issues include the validity of a specific section of the Electoral Act, the protection of the right to vote as enshrined by the Constitution, and the interpretation of residency requirements for candidates.
Mangwana’s argument was anchored on Kasukuwere’s absence from Zimbabwe for 18 months which made him ineligible to be in a presidential race citing section 23 (3) of the Electoral Act that does not allow a person who spends more that eighteen months out of the country to vote or being voted for.
“A voter who is registered on the voters roll for a constituency . . . shall not be entitled to have his or her name retained on such roll if, for a continuous period of eighteen months, he or she has ceased to reside in that constituency,” states the Constitution.
The activist claimed that Kasukuwere had not maintained residency in any constituency or in the country for more than 18 months.
As a result, he said that Kasukuwere’s name should be removed from the voter’s roll due to this circumstance.
Despite this setback, Kasukuwere’s representative, Jacqueline Sande, expressed their intention to take the matter back to the Supreme Court for another appeal.
Sande also indicated that they had another pending case at the Constitutional Court, related to the nullification of Kasukuwere’s candidacy by the High Court as well as a case seeking to prevent Zimbabwe Electoral Commission from changing the postal voting dates.
In response to the Constitutional ruling on his Twitter page, the former cabinet minister Savior Kasukuwere said that the Constitutional
Court’s decision opened a new avenue for him to launch another appeal at the Supreme Court.
“We have taken note of the judgment, and interestingly, it offers new possibilities for us to challenge the Supreme Court’s decision. Fortunately, we still have time. As long as the courtrooms are open, the battle continues until a conclusive decision is reached,” he said.
Commenting on the decision which was handed down by the Constitutional Court on social media, another former cabinet minister of Mugabe’s regime, Professor Jonathan Moyo has condemned the ruling citing that the Constitutional Court paid a blind eye to key constitutional issues bedeviling Kasukuwere’s presidential bid.
Kasukuwere had planned to participate as an independent candidate and was one of the 11 individuals who successfully filed their nominations on June 21 to compete in the Presidential election scheduled for August 23.