Claver Nyuki
The High Court ruling that Nelson Chamisa’s ascension to the positions of Deputy President, Acting President and substantive President were in violation of the MDC Constitution, has send Chamisa’s world crumbling down to earth and served as a reality check in a curious case of populism versus constitutionalism, putting his leadership of the party in disarray.
The appointment of Chamisa and Elias Mudzuri as MDC-T Vice Presidents by the late Morgan Tsvangirai has always been controversial as it has always been argued that the appointments were never approved by congress and were imposed on the party.
As if that was not enough, when Tsvangirai passed, the most senior and only elected Vice President, Thokozani Khupe was supposed to take over as the Acting President for at least one year before an extra ordinary elective congress was to be held to elect a substantive leader.
Chamisa’s assumption of power was and is controversial and unconstitutional at best. Government critics including Data Science expert, Freeman Chari was quick to accept that Khupe has got solid legal grounds to stand, he said, “The High Court ruling on MDC is tricky. We know it is political, but it gives Khupe legal claim over assets of MDC-T. Anything that was in MDC-T name last year virtually belongs to her party...”
He adds that the ruling has armed Khupe with the required legal basis to go after every asset within the MDC and ultimately go after Chamisa.
Legal expert and MDC-T Vice President, Obert Gutu took to social media to describe Chamisa as an illegitimate leader and urged the High Court ruling to be obeyed, “The High Court order has to be obeyed! Zimbabwe says NO to ILLEGITIMATE power grabbers! Musanyeberwa. Zizi harina nyanga!”
In legal terms, scholars say that the decision by the High Court is based on the concept of constitutionalism: the limitation of power by a supreme law. Article 6.4.4.1 of the MDC Constitution states that all members of the National Standing Committee, including the Deputy President(s), are elected at Congress. Both Chamisa and Mudzuri were appointed by Morgan Tsvangirai in July 2016, allegedly with the blessing of the National Council, but without being elected at Congress.
The MDC’s assessment of the ruling, unsurprisingly claimed that the ruling party, ZANU PF is part of the “machinations and strategies,” deployed by President Mnangagwa and his administration to derail and destroy the Chamisa led project. They claim that Khupe is a ZANU PF project that is being used to stop Chamisa, but forgetting that the High court judge only interpreted the MDC constitution as is.
Government critic and former advisor to Tsvangirai during the Government of National Unity (GNU), Alex Magaisa termed the judgement an “embarrassment to the legal and political system,” whilst MDC member and lawyer David Coltart called it a “desperate and pathetic move.”
Another MDC member and lawyer, Tendai Biti dismissed the ruling and declared Chamisa as the leader, “For the avoidance of doubt the leader of the Democratic Movement is Advocate Chamisa. This a de facto and de jure fact. Two point six million Zimbabweans agreed with that position on 30 July 2018. A court of law can never be an electoral college .We are MDC we are clear.”
It is not surprising that the likes of Biti, Coltart, Magaisa and Chamisa himself would dismiss the High Court ruling as it would plunge their political careers in the doldrums. The argument is based on Chamisa’s popularity rather that the Constitution itself. The ruling has also thrown a lifeline to Khupe and company who still believe they were victims of Chamisa dictatorship and power grabbing ways, whichever the outcome, it promises to be interesting times ahead for the MDC family.
