Tuesday, August 04

Khupe & Mwonzora Face Legal & Political Challenge

MDC-T leader Thokozani Khupe and her ally Douglas Mwonzora face a legal and political minefield following the crackdown against MDC Alliance legislators and councillors as part of their turf war against the party's leader Nelson Chamisa.

Khupe and Mwonzora have in recent months recalled 21 MDC Alliance legislators and scores of councillors using a Supreme Court ruling that Chamisa's elevation to succeed MDC founder Morgan Tsvangirai was null and void.

The ruling saw Khupe claiming control of the MDC Alliance despite the fact that the party defeated her MDC-T in harmonised elections two years ago.

Mwonzora, who was the MDC-T secretary-general before the 2018 split, is now the party's interim secretary-general.

The two have joined forces to launch an onslaught against Chamisa's base and one of the strategies is to strip him of legislators and councillors that have refused to dump him.

Khupe and some of her allies are lining up to replace the recalled legislators with the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) already in the process of facilitating the former deputy prime minister's return to Parliament through the back door.

Lobby groups and political analyst, however, say the MDC-T leaders risk falling foul of the law.

In a legal opinion, the Election Resource Centre said ZEC was violating the law by moving to replace MDC Alliance legislators with those from MDC-T while some court cases challenging the recall of the MPs were yet to be decided.

"In this case, there is room to challenge the constitutionality of the provisions, which compel ZEC to proceed with the process of filling vacancies even when affected Members of Parliament are still objecting to their recall," the ERC said.

"These provisions of the Electoral Act, which leave ZEC with no discretion in the matter, are arguably unconstitutional as they interfere with the rights to a fair hearing and the right to fair administrative justice."

Some of the recalled MPs argued in court cases that the MDCT could not legally cause their ejection from Parliament since it was not the one that sponsored them in the previous elections.

"The ERC believes that it is premature for ZEC to proceed, as it has done, to issue a notice of vacancies when there are pending legal cases aimed at determining the legality of vacancies," the ERC added.

"There are fundamental rights and freedoms, which are adversely affected by the hasty approach taken by ZEC in these matters."

The lobby group said the replacement of MPs when there were still pending cases in the courts was a violation of the right to fair trial as enshrined in section 69 of the constitution as well as an assault on administrative justice as provided in section 68.

"This right, which includes legitimate expectations, would be meaningless if administrative bodies proceeded to implement decisions that are still under legal challenge," the ERC said.

"For the same reason as the right to a fair hearing, the realisation of the right to fair administrative justice requires the legal process be concluded before a challenged decision is implemented."

ERC argued that while ZEC can claim to be bound by section 39(4) to issue a notice of vacancies once notified by the speaker of the National Assembly and the president of the Senate, affected legislators still had a right to fair trial.

"The current provisions of the Electoral Act, which compel ZEC to act to fill the vacancies before the resolution of legal disputes over the circumstances leading to the creation of the vacancy, are arguably unconstitutional for the above-stated reasons," it said.

ERC said the most important question ZEC should answer was whether the MDC-T was the right party to sponsor replacements for the recalled MPs.

"In the 2018 elections, the office-bearers who presented the party-list candidates to the nomination court did so on behalf of the MDC Alliance," it said.

"It is, therefore, the party-list of the MDC Alliance.

"In addition, according to section 45E(2), a nomination paper is required to state the name of the political party and the address of its main office in Zimbabwe; the abbreviation of the political party's name, which will appear on the ballot paper; and any distinctive symbol, which may accompany the name.

"The names, abbreviations and symbols that were put on the nomination papers of the affected Members of Parliament belonged to the MDC Alliance."

ERC added: "Fourth, section 45D(1)(b) provides for the disqualification of a candidate where he or she has been nominated as a party-list candidate by more than one political party in the same election.

"Consequently, a candidate can only be on the party-list of one political party. In this case, that political party was the MDC Alliance. They could not have been nominated by the MDC-T in the same election.

"If that were so, they would have been disqualified in accordance with the Electoral Act."

ERC said proportional representation MPs were awarded to the MDC Alliance candidates on the basis of votes obtained by the party as a single political party.

"Any separation could have produced an outcome that is wholly different from the current Parliament," ERC said.

"There can be no doubt that the political party in question was the MDC Alliance, not any other party.

"It is common cause that ZEC recognised the MDC Alliance as a political party for purposes of the 2018 elections.

"ZEC is required to invite the political party to submit a nomination to fill the vacancy.

"It has already been argued that based on the facts arising from the 2018 elections, the proper party that ZEC should invite to fill the vacancy is the MDC Alliance."

The ERC said the reason why party-lists were filed was to ensure that the political party that fielded the candidate has the right to replace the MP if incapacitated.

"The ERC posits that the situation cannot be different if the vacancy arises after the election result is known," the ERC said.

Ten residents' associations from across the country have condemned the recalling of councillors by Khupe and Mwonzora, which they described as an attack on democracy.

"The rampant recall of elected councillors is a direct attack on representative democracy and seeks to throw away residents to the periphery of local governance, which has serious implications on both service delivery and answerability of officials to the electorate," the residents' associations said in a joint statement on Friday.

"Political parties must not act supreme over the voter; residents are the number one stakeholder in every political process and should be treated with respect."

They said the recalls do not benefit the voters as they were motivated by a fight for power.

Combined Harare Residents' Association, Guruve Residents and Ratepayers' Association, Ruwa Residents' Association, Marondera Progressive Residents and Ratepayers' Association and the Mvurwi Residents' Association signed the statement.

Others were Kadoma Progressive Residents' Association, Masvingo Residents and Ratepayers' Association, Simukai Residents' Trust and Chitungwiza and Manyame Residents and Ratepayers' Association.

Obert Gutu, Khupe's former deputy in the MDC-T, said although the recalling of MDC Alliance MPs was lawful, replacing them with members of a party they defeated in the last elections was morally wrong.

"Recall of MPs and councillors resonates with law's dictates," Gutu said.

"However, a moral issue arises: It's morally unsound and incredulous to replace the recalled MPs with people from another faction.

"Politically, it's also not smart.

"Recall to enforce discipline, yes, show class, don't replace."

Gutu said he would not accept nomination into Parliament by the Khupe group on moral grounds.

"This is legally correct and bad politics, it is like telling someone who voted for Caps United that the result shows that he had voted for Dynamos," the former Justice deputy minister said.

"Next time you still want to go and ask them for your votes. Will they trust you?

"This is a completely zero-sum game and I urge all the concerned parties to reach a compromise." Rashweat Mukundu, a political analyst, said Khupe and Mwonzora were taking voters for granted.

"This is undermining the interests of voters because the people participated in an election where ballot papers were clearly marked and they knew the party and person they were voting for," Mukundu said.

He said by including herself on the list, Khupe had shown that the recalls were motivated by greed and not the interests of voters.

  • Share:

Info News

Debt Consolidation Loans: Simplifying Financial Recovery for Consumers

Debt consolidation loans are helping consumers regain control of their finances by combining multiple debts into one manageable payment. Individuals struggling with high-interest credit cards, medical bills, personal loans, and other debts often use consolidation loans to simplify repayment and reduce financial stress.

rnrn

One of the biggest benefits of debt consolidation is the potential to secure lower interest rates. Reduced interest can make monthly payments more affordable while decreasing the total amount repaid over time. Many lenders offer flexible repayment plans that help borrowers choose payment schedules suited to their financial situation.

rnrn

Debt consolidation can also improve financial organization and reduce the risk of missed payments. Consistent repayment habits may gradually strengthen credit scores and improve long-term financial stability. However, financial advisors warn that borrowers should avoid accumulating additional debt while repaying consolidation loans.

rnrn

Before applying for consolidation loans, consumers should compare lenders carefully and understand repayment terms, fees, and interest structures. Responsible financial planning and budgeting are essential for long-term debt management success.

rn

DUI Defense Lawyer: Common Legal Defenses in Drunk Driving Cases

DUI defense lawyer, DUI defenses, drunk driving defense, DUI attorney, beat DUI charge, DUI case defense, DUI evidence

rnrn

DUI Defense Lawyer: Common Legal Defenses in Drunk Driving Cases

rnrn

A DUI arrest is not the same as a conviction. Prosecutors must prove the case, and the defense has the right to challenge the evidence.

rnrn

A DUI defense lawyer looks for legal, factual, and technical problems in the government’s case.

rnrn

Every DUI case is different. Some defenses focus on the traffic stop. Others focus on field sobriety tests, chemical testing, officer procedure, or whether the person was actually impaired.

rnrn

Defense 1: Illegal Traffic Stop

rnrn

Police usually need a legal reason to stop a driver.

rnrn

Possible stop reasons include:

rnrn

Speeding
rnSwerving
rnRunning a red light
rnExpired tag
rnEquipment violation
rnAccident investigation
rnReasonable suspicion of impaired driving

rnrn

If the stop was not legally justified, evidence gathered after the stop may be challenged.

rnrn

Defense 2: No Probable Cause for Arrest

rnrn

Even if the stop was legal, the officer must have enough evidence to make a DUI arrest.

rnrn

A lawyer may review:

rnrn

Driving behavior
rnOfficer observations
rnSpeech
rnBalance
rnOdor of alcohol
rnField sobriety tests
rnStatements
rnVideo evidence
rnMedical conditions

rnrn

If probable cause was weak, the arrest may be challenged.

rnrn

Defense 3: Field Sobriety Test Problems

rnrn

Field sobriety tests are not always reliable.

rnrn

A person may perform poorly because of:

rnrn

Medical conditions
rnAnxiety
rnFatigue
rnAge
rnInjury
rnPoor footwear
rnUneven ground
rnWeather
rnBad instructions
rnLanguage barriers

rnrn

A DUI lawyer may compare the officer’s report to body camera or dash camera video.

rnrn

Defense 4: Breath Test Issues

rnrn

Breath testing can be challenged if the machine or procedure was flawed.

rnrn

Potential issues include:

rnrn

Improper calibration
rnLack of maintenance
rnOfficer certification problems
rnMouth alcohol
rnVomiting or burping before test
rnMedical conditions
rnImproper observation period
rnRadio frequency interference claims
rnTesting outside required time windows

rnrn

A breath result is only as strong as the procedure behind it.

rnrn

Defense 5: Blood Test Problems

rnrn

Blood tests may be challenged based on:

rnrn

Improper blood draw
rnContamination
rnChain of custody
rnStorage problems
rnLab errors
rnFermentation
rnTesting delays
rnDocumentation gaps
rnQualified person requirements

rnrn

A lawyer may request lab records and review whether the sample was handled properly.

rnrn

Defense 6: Rising Blood Alcohol

rnrn

A rising blood alcohol defense argues that the person’s BAC was lower while driving and rose by the time of testing.

rnrn

This may be relevant when there is a delay between the stop and the chemical test.

rnrn

The defense depends on drinking timeline, food intake, body weight, test timing, and expert analysis.

rnrn

Defense 7: Medical Conditions

rnrn

Some medical conditions can affect DUI evidence.

rnrn

Examples may include:

rnrn

Diabetes
rnAcid reflux
rnNeurological disorders
rnBalance disorders
rnEye conditions
rnInjuries
rnFatigue
rnAnxiety
rnMedication side effects

rnrn

A medical issue does not automatically defeat a DUI charge, but it may explain certain observations.

rnrn

Defense 8: Not Actually Driving

rnrn

Some cases involve people found in parked vehicles.

rnrn

Legal issues may include:

rnrn

Was the person driving?
rnWas the engine on?
rnWhere were the keys?
rnWas the vehicle operable?
rnWas the person sleeping?
rnDid anyone witness driving?

rnrn

State laws vary on what counts as driving or actual physical control.

rnrn

Defense 9: Police Report vs. Video Evidence

rnrn

Police reports sometimes make a case look stronger than video shows.

rnrn

A DUI lawyer may review:

rnrn

Body camera footage
rnDash camera footage
rnBooking video
rnRoadside testing video
rnAudio recordings
rnJail observation video

rnrn

Video can confirm or contradict officer claims.

rnrn

Defense 10: Constitutional Violations

rnrn

A DUI case may involve constitutional issues such as:

rnrn

Unlawful stop
rnUnlawful search
rnImproper questioning
rnViolation of rights
rnImproper detention
rnLack of warrant where required

rnrn

A lawyer may file motions to suppress evidence if legal rights were violated.

rnrn

Final Thoughts

rnrn

A DUI defense lawyer does not rely on one-size-fits-all arguments. The defense depends on the evidence.

rnrn

Traffic stop, arrest procedure, field sobriety testing, chemical testing, video evidence, and constitutional issues all matter.

rnrn

If you are charged with DUI, get the evidence reviewed before deciding what to do next.

rn