When asked to comment on the Constitutional Court proceedings, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) responded, through its Africa Programme Director Arnold Tsunga, “We are aware that the African Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF) issued an exit statement that focused on procedural aspects of the case and not the substance of the outcome.
The fact that the case was held in open court and parties to the dispute given equal time to present their cases and that the decision was handed in open court and within the timelines provided for by the law is the reason why the AJJF possibly came out that way on exit.
However since the court did not hand the full judgment with reasons it is better to wait for the full judgment and reasons for such judgment before we comment on substantive aspects of the judgment. At this stage we were surprised by the order of costs against the litigant as that is not normally done in matters where the application is not frivolous and involves a significant public interest issues as this one did.”
In Zimbabwe, the Courts can go for several months, if not years, without handing full judgment in a case. It still remains to be seen how long it will take Zimbabwe’s apex Court to deliver full judgment with reasons in this much publicised electoral challenge.
Walter Nyabadza is a Zimbabwean lawyer and legal advisor for the National Reclamation Assembly. He writes in his personal capacity and can be contacted on [PHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL REDACTED]