By Mari Matutu | We have since defined deception as “Deception is an act or statement which misleads, hides the truth, or promotes a belief, concept, or idea that is not true. It is often done for personal gain or advantage” . I will bring down this definition close to our discussion.
Today I will unpack the deception in the SC ruling. The players, events and dates.
31 March 2020.
The government had announced a lock down. No one was allowed to move around. There was fear of deadly disease COVID 19. Information was made to the public that SC was going to deliver its judgement.
Khupe as a party to the case was obviously made aware of this judgement by court itself. However the deception move was put in motion starting with her. She was pampered with hope that she was going to be given back her party position and It was her turn to revenge Chamisa.
She made the public aware that she will be attending court. The public would focus their mind on Khupe as a person playing with zanu. Actually we were content that she was finished.
At the background, Morgan Komichi who lost the post of Vice president at Congress, felt betrayed by Chamisa. In his mind he was suppose to be the VP. It is important to pick one point of deception here. Komichi never wanted to fight Chamisa, but wanted to be his VP. From the two elected male VPs it becomes obvious there is one whom Komichi felt did not deserve the post. Your choice. Is it Welshman Ncube or Biti? Events must show you from nominations and other events that generally Ncube was accepted by all as the VP. Most likely Komichi felt Biti did not deserve the seat than him. Anyone who take the actions of Komichi at the door step of SC as deception, miss the definition of deception. He could have peddled falsehoods but out of ignorance. He was being used by someone behind the scene. This someone was the one playing deception at that juncture.
It is this background that Mwonzora used to wedge a bad blood between Komichi and Chamisa. The feeling of betrayal left Komichi selling out. He was a victim of deception which led him to selling out.
He was told that the court will return to “2014” structures and he will becomes the Chair. The words will come from the Judge himself. In order for Komichi not to change mind after the judgement had been discussed by others, he was advised to make the announcement at the door steps. To Komichi it was a shocker move to his “betrayers” but to his handlers it was a trap. They Let him be the announcer and the rest follows. After setting him up, he could not reverse. He will not be acceptable by the rest of membership should he change. He will have to play along.
If people cannot see that Komichi’s action of announcing the court judgement was out of Mwonzora’s and his team of deception then you will not see the picture.
.
Komichi’s announcement had the following lies that still have legs even today.
a) The lie that SC said Chamisa is illegitimate leader of MDC. (Please read page 35 of SC judgement SC said “ Secondly, and equally significantly, he was unanimously elected as the President of the Party, i.e. the one that is presently before this Court, at its Congress convened in June 2019. These are the inescapable facts that loom large on the country’s political landscape.” Actually the court said its “inescapable)
2 / 8
b) That the SC made Khupe acting president of MDC , Komichi was made the Chair and Mwonzora SG. (Please read page 33-34 of SC judgement on principles of mootness .I will not paste it here but SC stated clearly that the second principle state it clearly that courts give determination on moot case not for practical application on present matter but for some other use were the determination can practically apply. The court stated it as a well established principle and cited other cases were it was applied. Please read it yourself.)
c) That the SC gave a judgement on moot case for practical application on present moot case.
(Read again page 40, court itself stated what it was handing over, in advance, so that you read the disposition of the judgement knowing its meaning. The court says
“In short, notwithstanding the political mootness of this matter, it is imperative that there should be an authoritative determination of this appeal in the interests of justice.”
No genuine person could miss this important part after reading page 34 of judgement on second principle of mootness. Never.)
d) That the SC said go back to 2014 structures. This is a lie that many believed even today. ( read page 40 on Disposition
“Disposition
The essence and objective of the corrective measures to be implemented by the Party is to restore the status quo ante that prevailed before the irregular and unlawful appointments to the Party presidency took place. This would necessitate having to extend the time limit prescribed in the Party constitution apropos the convening of an Extra-Ordinary Congress to elect a new President following the demise of Dr Tsvangirai. It would also involve modifying the judgment a quo to conform with that purpose.”
It can be seen by all genuine people who have read and understood principle 2 of mootness in page 33 to 34 and understood that SC is giving an authoritative determination for interest of justice despite the fact of political mootness of present case as stated in page 40. It is clear the SC went to status quo of 15 July 2016, where the presidium was constituting the president , deputy president and National Chair. So the court wanted to show how things should have gone at the time of death of president Tsvangirai and how HC should have written its judgement following the status quo of presidium as at 15 July 2016, the date of appointments of President Chamisa and Mudzuri. It never said go back 2014 structures
e) That the SC gave an operative judgement that was live when it had already ruled the case was rendered moot. ( As we have seen already that the court followed principle 2 of mootness and have seen that court stated that it is giving an authoritative determination and went further to state it is amending HC judgement. It is deceptive for anyone to say court gave a live operation order. Not true, as long as the operative order is read correctly word by word. “It is accordingly ordered as follows:
1.The appeal be and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
2.The judgment of the court a quo be and is hereby confirmed, save for the deletion of paragraphs 4 and 5 of the operative order.
3.The third respondent, in her capacity as the Acting President of the first appellant, be and is hereby ordered to convene an Extra-Ordinary Congress, within a period of three months from the date of this order, in order to elect a new President”
Some words look lame and remote to the case but they determine a course. The word “accordingly” in the first statement of the operative judgement direct everyone to read and interpret the judgement as an authoritative determination being given on principle 2 of mootness. It can no longer apply on present matter but other use. Simple and illustrated
3 / 8
application of this determination was deleting order 4 and 5 of HC judgement on same case and amending the same judgement by introducing order 3 and 4. That is practical application of this determination which could not have happened if the SC had just declared case is moot and academic. Case closed. Clear the SC never gave a live operative judgement. It gave an authoritative determination. This will stand up against any attempt to interpret it otherwise as long as the word “accordingly” stand as it is on the statement of operative judgement. So it is a lie that SC gave live operating order . )
e) The lie that the SC gave dubious judgement.
(If dubious is correctly interpreted, it cannot miss that it is unprincipled and it is first time for a court to give such judgement. The court clearly stated and defined principles of mootness as well established principles, and further cited cases that were these principles were applied. Where is the judgement dubious? Someone is trying to remove people from focusing on judgement.)
f) The lie that the party that Chamisa is leading is called MDC A or the party that was left by Tsvangirai was called MDC Tsvangirai. ( Not until you see the deception in it. People are cheated to deny whom they are because of fear or the name MDC T . They know that Tsvangirai used the name MDC T in election 2008 and 2013, so when Khupe took the name to election 2018 they feel the party is going back to Khupe.
On the other hand MDC A is a properly constituted “party” that does not include natural persons but juristic members who are 7 political formations as represented by 7 principals. No natural person can claim to be a member of MDC A. An Alliance document is there as legal instrument that can be used by anyone to prove a point. Chamisa as individual was chosen from among political parties to be the presidential candidate and his facial image was used in election 2018 . Morgan Tsvangirai signed the Alliance agreement as principal of MDC T. This blurs the distinction between MDC T led by Khupe and MDC T that appear on Alliance agreement as represented by Tsvangirai.
However in the SC record we have two distinct points which direct us on this matter. Page2 of judgement
“ Background
The first appellant is the Movement for Democratic Change, a political party which has capacity to sue and be sued in its own name (“the Party”).
Then page 35
“Secondly, and equally significantly, he was unanimously elected as the President of the Party, i.e. the one that is presently before this Court, at its Congress convened in June 2019.”
The court record state clearly that this MDC has no T or Tsvangirai in front of it and it is a juristic person who can sue or be sued on her own. This is the same party that held a congress and unanimously elected Chamisa at that congress held in June 2019. The same MDC was before the court.
g) Where do the names MDC T/ MDC Tsvangirai or MDC A come from?
That is part of deception.
h) Why have these facts not been furthered or the lies still have legs? That is the deception.
4 / 8
i) Why were members of MDC forced to state they are members of MDC Alliance led by Adv Chamisa when everyone saw Morgan Tsvangirai signing Alliance agreement as a constitutive document?
j) Why were the first 5 MPs influenced to state they are not part of MDC in court or they have formed their own party?
These are facts which are at law indisputable. You cannot change them. Any person in MDC or outside MDC will have questions on what these 5 narrated in their affidavits.
The question that then arise is, why have these lies not been exposed even today, in all forums? We have best lawyers in our team. These lies have nothing technical about them. You do not need to be a professor in law or an Advocate to know this. Simple comprehension skills can refute these lies.
This is were I unpack Mwonzora’s deception using actors within us to “ misleads, hides the truth, or promotes a belief, concept, or idea that is not true with full knowledge that the same is not true.
A) 1 April 2020.
The loyal members of Chamisa who believed the lie that SC had given Khupe the party or made Khupe acting president of party or Chamisa was declared illegitimate by SC or SC ordered Khupe to practically convene an EOC tried to defend the party.
What ever action Hwende took during all this, he was acting through ignorance. He did not have any deception in mind. He was in 2014 structure so he had option to say he is still a deputy treasurer. He had no legal background to suggest that he knew the implications of what he was saying. He also had no personal gain in this whole thing. No ways he was part of deception during that time, so is Khumalo,Timvious and Mutseyami.
Personal gain and actual intent to lie or further the interest of a lie are components of deception. You cannot prove these on the 5 MPs.
B) To pick up the deception trail, you look at the affidavits they signed to express the point that they are MDC A and not MDC T or not being the party that was before court. A study of the contents of the affidavits prove that they had crucial evidence on the question of which party did Tsvangirai leave behind and which party is Chamisa leading. The affidavits touch all the points of not being MDC T and not being part of MDC before court but that they formed their own party MDC A with a constitution
C) Who was the lawyer behind these affidavits?
Did this lawyer also believed that SC had given MDC to Khupe?
Did this lawyer also believed the SC has said Chamisa was illegitimate? Did the lawyer believed that MDC A was a political party where natural person can belong as a member without first belonging to an affiliate party ?
That would require you to look at the said lawyer as to who this lawyer is.
D) Jacob Mafume.
Jacob Mafume is a lawyer, a member of MDC who attended congress of June 2019. He was a member of PDP party which is a signatory to MDC A. He was an elected councillor of Harare
5 / 8
under MDC A in 2018 election. Upon the recall of Herbert Gomba as mayor of Harare , Jacob Mafume was elected Mayor of Harare.
An attempt to recall him was made and he got a court order that state as fact, that those who recalled him had no capacity to do so since Hon Biti owns PDP by way of registration of intellectual properties and in PDP constitutive documents, no one can be recalled for belonging to MDC only. These are facts.
You cannot change them. Do these facts prove that Mafume as a lawyer did not know or understand that Chamisa was not declared illegitimate by SC, that MDC A is a constituted entity of 7 juristic person with PDP being a member, that in Gweru we held a congress of MDC and not MDC A and Biti was elected as an individual to be Vice President of MDC not MDC A, that MDC which was at congress in Gweru, made resolution about the SC case and expelled Khupe from MDC and not MDC T, that by resolution of MDC congress Biti was re admitted back into MDC and was bound by MDC constitution, that Biti is bound by MDC constitution so could not in terms of MDC constitution belong to his PDP and at the same time be MDC VP.
As a lawyer who has access to MDC constitution, Mafume could read article 1 and 2 of constitution from copies which were handed to every delegate at congress. If he had no time to open the constitution, one has to ask himself how he also managed to missed the words MDC 5th congress that were written on every T shirt or cap that was physically handed to each member of MDC that was present. Those T shirts must bear testimony of whom we are and which party was at congress to date. Any person representing MDC who is a congress delegate is a witness that we are MDC not MDC A or MDC T or MDC Tsvangirai where ever he or she is.
Having established the lie that Chamisa is not actually leading a party called MDC A but MDC and proved that all evidence prove that Mafume was aware and had full technical expertise to tell that MDC A cannot have natural persons as its members but one has to first have to be a member of one of the members of MDC A in order to belong to it. You then ask, did Mafume act in furthering this lie? Evidence is there that he sought affidavits from unsuspecting members of MDC and for fear of having the party being taken over by Khupe of MDC T they agreed. Yet the meaning of MDC T as led by Khupe which went to election 2018 and MDC T that was on Alliance agreement had different meaning.
Khupe’s MDC T held a congress and elected a full leadership under that name and contested election 2018 under that name with a complete new symbol.
Where as MDC T that appear on Alliance agreement which was being represented by Tsvangirai, had a background of 2008,2013 elections but more particular the congress resolution of 2014, after Mafume and others had split from MDC. The resolution said the constitution of the party must be amended such that we protect the party from splits. In particular, that the president shall be the custodian of the party Name and party Symbol. This amendment brought article 9.1.3 of MDC constitution to being.
Again in terms of article 3.7 of MDC it is clear MDC as a juristic person can enter into Alliance with other progressive entities.
The decision to use the name MDC T as a way of distinction between MDC led by Professor Ncube and one led by Dr Tsvangirai was first ratified in our MDC Bulawayo congress of 2011 and
6 / 8
has always been our legal instrument when ever a distinction of the two MDCs was required. When Dr Tsvangirai signed Alliance agreement it is common cause that Prof Ncube was also leading a political party MDC. Any person would understand that there was need for that document to give a distinction between MDC led by Professor Ncube and his. He applied the congress resolution of 2014 as well as article 9.1.3 of constitution.
Again his decision to enter Alliance agreement with other 6 political parties using name MDC T was ratified by Gweru congress of MDC.
It should have been clear to Mafume that actually Khupe poses no threat to anyone and SC itself had already noted the evidence that she had moved on and formed her own party MDC T.
Yet from the well crafted affidavits the MDC members are told to deny that they are MDC and told to state that the congress was held under MDC A. They are told that MDC T Khupe is leading is the same as MDC T on Alliance agreement. In defence the members state that they formed their own party with separate constitution of its own.
D) We are almost close to prove deception. Stay cool. Did Mafume stood to benefit from this lie? Answer is yes, if not two yeses.
PDP was a partner in MDC Alliance agreement. If MDC T was to stand as a political party that was in Alliance agreement and not as MDC which was using a distinction name MDC T then PDP stood to gain from the lie in the sense that while other MPs or councillors under MDC A could be recalled by MDC T members of, PDP would not be recalled. So proof of personal benefit was there from word go. You can track the wording of affidavits and prove he drafted it with a motive.
E) Did Mafume later own benefited from this lie? Again yes, if not three yeses. His lie facilitated the recall of Herbert Gomba and he was elected Mayor of Harare again under the guise that because he is from PDP, Mwonzora camp will not recall him. He further bolster his support of the lie by pretending to go before court after a recall by “Mai Matibenga.”
What he actually wanted was a court order that pronounces that he was PDP and PDP was part of MDC A and hence he could not be recalled.
Either way , by this court verdict you cannot miss that he has confirmed existence of Alliance agreement and he has already claimed the rights of PDP in MDC A so far. Many people do not realise that PDP has staffed its councillors from the recalled “MDC T” in ALLIANCE so far under the deception that we are cheating recall from Mwonzora. So yes he and PDP have benefited from the lie.
F) Does Mafume intent to use the lie further in future. Yes and if not four yeses
.
Ask yourselves why people who had their own party way back in 2014, would have a clause that says they cannot be recalled for joining MDC. What was the motive of having a PDP was protected as belonging to Biti as his own assert? What prompted them to do that? It is because they want to use it again and again.
7 / 8
G) Should it be proven that actually MDC A is actually a political pact, does Mafume and PDP stand to lose?
Careful in answering this deceptive question. The answer is always yes but on a different notes.
Yes on obviously established fact that PDP is a member of MDC A but more particular in the sense that after the lie that Chamisa is leading a political party that is called MDC A is finally exposed by a court, then members of PDP and all fake loyalists of Chamisa who are in parliament would join MDC Tsvangirai as led by Mwonzora and not MDC T led by Khupe.
To cleanse itself zanu will rule that all illegal MPs in parliament are illegal . That MDC A is a pact of 7 political parties but by electoral law one cannot be recalled for belonging to MDC A which is a political party these MPs were elected under. So the recalls we null and void.
However MDC A belongs to jurist persons and no individual can belong to MDC A. You have to belong to one of the 7. In the mean time you have affidavits stating that you are not MDC in court and you formed your own party MDC A. By the same ruling the National Chair and SG of MDC cannot go to court and claim or defend the party MDC because of their affidavits.
That is why Biti the president of PDP withheld the legal challenge of Khupe as member of parliament under MDC T. She will be ruled illegal. Then all the recalls done under leadership of Khupe are said to be illegal. This means all MPs will go back into parliament at the mercy of Mwonzora. By then all the negotiations aa said on audios of Mbondia will be ready. No one can defend the party by that time. All the Chete Chete will be flock without a party.
Please do not miss that SC in its disposition stated clearly that it went to the status quo at 15 July, where the Chairman would “assume” role of president of MDC in the absence of President and Deputy president. Morgan Komichi was part of all the election process and he physically signed election papers.
By the words “assume the role of president” it must be realised that all the actions of MDC that was led by Tsvangirai had a Principal in the name of Komichi. That is the why the deception team deceived him to join them and do not want to lose him at the moment.
If the lies keep their legs, pachava nekugeda geda kwameno. That is why you see the panic after my earlier exposure. The regime and deception team was in motion. The likes of Alex Magaisa are being discredited in advance, a topic of registering political parties is muted. Biti is talking of talks. Sikhala is almost exposing.
Do not be fooled by the arrests of Mafume and Sikhala. They are paid for cover ups. Strange enough Sikhala and Chin’ono went into custody for a non existent offence but with a court order to be treated special in prison. Which is better to let someone go or looking for special place. It part of making you believe the lies
Anti dot
1) Everyone must go back to SC ruling and accept it as not dubious but as a correct judgement that ruled the matter moot after Chamisa was unanimously elected.
2) Prove with screen shots of judgement every point that repel the lies.
3) Prove that the SC in its wording said the election of Chamisa as president of MDC is in escapable.
8 / 8
4) Prove to the public that the name of the party that was before court is the one that held congress and was the one that was left by Tsvangirai as well as the same party that used the name MDC T in Alliance agreement based on 2008 and 2014 congress of MDC resolution as well as article 9.1.3 of constitution.
5) Prove that by SC ruling which stated that National Chair of the party shall assume the role of president if the president and deputy president are not around, Morgan Komichi acted on behalf of MDC in 2018 election and called the party MDC A for purpose of election. Exercising provision of 9.1.3 as well as all resolutions of 2014 which included the big tent. So yes MDC entered election 2018 under the burner MDC A. That decision was ratified by congress Gweru.
6) That by SC ruling which declared that Chamisa’s appointment as deputy president in 2016 and subsequent appointment as president in 2018 were null and void then it means it never happened. Chamisa never ever took power but elected Deputy president and National Chair were always there and available to assume the role of president. However Chamisa was unanimously elected president. No one is punished for a null and void event because it never happened.
7) Chamisa now as the unanimously elected president of MDC has powers and prerogative to call MDC that was before the court which is also appear in MDC A agreement by the name MDC A if he wants the electorate to know the distinction between MDC left by Tsvangirai from the one represented by Khupe. If in any case his decision is wrong it awaits ratification of congress of MDC in 2024
8) State it clear that the attempt to practically implement the SC as live is null and void abnitio
9) Make these public announcement before High Court Judgement because what ever the HC judge says can only be rectified by way of appeal. The system will stall the process.
10) Once it is exposed before hand, it has one bearing. All these matters depend on SC ruling and its interpretation. Every High Court judge is bound by SC judgements. If facts of SC judgement are put in public domain correctly the HC judge has no cover to hide.
11) Currently the hide out a judge has is the lie peddled to you about SC ruling as well as the lie that courts are captured or the judge who presided over the case of the first 5 recalled MPs is zanu.
12) Capture the judge to give what we were already been given by SC.
13) Tell Khupe that actually Mwonzora took MDC T which belong to her because it is the only party that held a congress under the name MDC T for second time in a raw. In our own MDC she had since lost capacity to execute any duties of MDC president by operation of law.
Done. Chamisa Chete Chete.
I will proceed in exposing other deceptions of Mwonzora and his actors in part 4. For now make yourself comfortable for more.
Like this:
Like Loading...
