Mujuru files Con Court challenge to Presidential decree providing a legal framework for bond notes legality

Zimbabwe People First leader Dr Joice Mujuru has gone to the Constitutional Court to challenge the legality of a Presidential decree providing a legal framework for the introduction of bond notes as legal tender.

President Mugabe issued a decree this week authorising the introduction of bond notes, which are expected to ease the liquidity crunch gripping the country.

Dr Mujuru filed her application in the Constitutional Court on Friday and listed President Mugabe, Parliament, Finance and Economic Minister Patrick Chinamasa, Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Governor Dr John Mangudya and Attorney-General Advocate Prince Machaya as respondents.

She wants an order declaring that President Mugabe, by exercising Parliament’s primary law-making power through Statutory Instrument 133 of 2016, failed to fulfil his constitutional obligations to obey certain provisions of the Constitution.

She also wants the regulations to be nullified for want of fulfilling the constitutional obligations.”First respondent (President Mugabe) has a constitutional obligation to uphold, defend, obey and respect this Constitution as the supreme law of the nation and must ensure that this Constitution and all other laws are faithfully observed,” she stated in her affidavit.

She contends that President Mugabe has no constitutional authority to make statutory instruments and amend Acts of Parliament.

The President, she further avers, should also ensure that none of his ministers make statutory instruments that amend Acts of Parliament.

“In breach of that constitutional obligation he (President Mugabe) has made SI 133/2016,” she argues. “As the SI 133/2016 has been made contrary to a constitutional obligation, it is a nullity.”

Dr Mujuru also argues that instead of resorting to the Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act (Chap 10:20), President Mugabe has a duty to initiate legislation to repeal the statute. “As Head of State, he ought to allow Parliament to do its work,” she says.

“Given that his Government finalised this policy in May 2016, why did he not allow the passage of a Bill in Parliament? Be that as it may, a repeal is superfluous because those of its provisions that contradict the Constitution are void.” source bulawayo24

Leave a Comment