Case Law

Justice Alfred Mavedzenge v Minister of Justice and others judgment

Justice Mavedzenge challenged the validity of section 192 (6) of the Electoral Act which gives a government Minister power to approve and disapprove regulations proposed by the Zimbabwe Electoral  Commission. Mavedzenge argued that such powers are contrary to section 235 of the Constitution which stipulates that the electoral commission shall not be subject to the direction, control and interference from anyone. The Constitutional Court dismissed this application and its reasons are contained in this judgment. You can follow these links for media coverage. You can also follow the story here.

Mateta v ZEC and others

Abraham Mateta sought the Court to compel the electoral commission and Government of Zimbabwe to put in place measures to ensure that visually impaired voters can exercise their freedom to vote by secret ballot in all elections. Justice Mavedzenge and Innocent Maja acted on behalf of Mateta. The judgment is pending. You can follow these links for media coverage.

Justice Mavedzenge v Chairperson of Zimbabwe Electoral Commission

Relying directly on Section 62(1), the Constitutional right of access to information, held by State institutions,  the Applicant sought the Court to grant him an order that compels the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission to provide him with access to the electronic copy of the national voters roll as well as to upload the same on an online platform accessible to the public. Applicant also sought a declatur to the effect that citizens have a right to access an electronic copy of the voter’s roll. You can follow the story here.

Peter Makani and Others v Epworth Local Board and Minister of Local Government

Relying on Section 74 Constitutional Right to Freedom from Arbitrary eviction and vindicating the interpretation of this right as discussed in A Constitutional Guide Towards Understanding Zimbabwe’s Fundamental Socio-economic and Cultural Human Rights, Justice Nicholas Matonsi vindicated the applicants’ right not to have their homes demolished without court authorisation.

Loveness Mudzuru and others v Minister of Justice and others

This was a constitutional challenge against the legality of child marriages. In its judgment, the Constitutional Court made reference to Mavedzenge’s book on socio-economic rights.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s