CHAMISA VS TSHABANGU IN COURT : PROF MOYO'S TAKE newsdzeZimbabweNewsdzeZimbabwe

CHAMISA VS TSHABANGU IN COURT : PROF MOYO’S TAKE newsdzeZimbabweNewsdzeZimbabwe


For some time, many have wondered why Nelson Chamisa went to great lengths to avoid filing affidavits in the Central Criminal Court summons cases that have been the political and legal story, in the wake of the 2023 concerted general elections.

When Chamisa resigned as CCC president on 25 January 2024, he appeared to have succeeded in avoiding having to file an affidavit in court to express his opinion on the CCC debacle.

but when CCC and Tshabangu sued Chamisa as the sole defendant in the looting case after riotous blue-clad protesters, claiming to be Chamisa, painted the CCC offices in Bulawayo blue. This time Chamisa had no choice but to appear in court.

Below are brief excerpts of the main submissions made by Chabangu about himself and Chamisa under oath in his affidavit; For the first time in affidavit and also under oath, Chamisa’s main responses to Chabangu:

Chabangu’s main statement about himself, Chamisa and CCC:

“I, Singiso Chabangu, do hereby swear, swear and declare as follows:

1. I am the Interim Secretary-General of the applicant and I am duly authorized to make this affidavit in that capacity, and hereafter

is authorized to do so as appears more fully from the Applicant Decision attached hereto and marked “ST1”.

2. The facts presented here are, to the best of my knowledge, true and correct, unless the context indicates otherwise. When I make assertions of a legal nature, I do so on advice

3. Applicant’s legal practitioners, I believe that the advice is a true and correct presentation of the law. The applicant’s service address is in the care of my registered legal practitioners, Ncube Attorneys, 12A Park Road, Suburbs, Bulawayo.

4. The applicant is the Citizens’ Alliance for Change, a public law university and recognized political party operating in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe and with the capacity to bring and be prosecuted.”

Chamisa’s main responses to Chabangu’s affidavit:

“I, The undersigned

Nelson Chamisa

I do hereby swear and do so to state;

1. I am the defendant in this matter. The facts I propose here are to the best of my knowledge, information and belief true and correct. When I do not have personal knowledge of certain facts, I have made efforts to verify them. When I make assertions regarding legal propositions, I do so with the advice of attorneys who believe that they are legally sound.

. I have read and understood the founding affidavit of Singizo Chabangu. I would like to point out at the outset that I am an unwilling participant in this lawsuit. I have now had to present my defense because compensation, including an order to pay costs, is sought personally against me. I have nothing to do with this at all and there is no problem with my behavior.

3. I respond to the founding statement, where necessary, as follows:

Advertisement for 1 – 4

4. There are no issues except to note that the respondent’s address for service is as it appears on the face of the Notice of Opposition.”

comment

There are four very important and therefore important factual and legal reasons the following conclusions emerge and are notable from Chamisa’s game-changing affidavit:

1. Chabangu stated under oath in his affidavit that he is the interim Secretary General of the CCC and that he has the authority to act in the CCC.

2. In response, under oath in his first affidavit dealing with Chabangu’s position and authority at CCC, Chamisa neither denied that Chabangu is the interim Secretary General of Triple C nor denied that Chabangu had the authority to act for CCC. In legal effect, Chamisa acknowledged that Chabangu is the interim Secretary-General of the CCC and has the authority to dispose of the CCC. It is worth noting that this is what Chabangu has said and maintained in court papers since the start of litigation in the subpoena cases.

3. Although Chabangu’s status as interim Secretary General of Triple C and his authority to act for the CCC are not questioned, Chamisa does not deny the identity and existence of the CCC.

4. Chabangu says in his affidavit that Chamisa was the plaintiff’s boss [CCC] He says in his affidavit that he was authorized to act for CCC, and Chamisa does not deny that he was at that time the applicant’s boss [CCC]. He actually accepts this fact, but says he resigned. In other words, Chamisa accepts that he was Chairman of the same ACC for which Chabangu is interim Secretary-General and has the authority to act on its behalf.

5. However, while he does not deny the identity and existence of the CCC, Chamisa also says, in his affidavit in response to Chabangu, in his own words: “I would like to reiterate that I have no particular association with any colour, any political organization or any movement.” This pays for some who abuse the CCC account on X and others who play pretentious games in Parliament, calling themselves blue and claiming to be acting for or with Chamisa in the legislature; And those who are running blue, claiming to be paving the way for the “Blue Movement” under Chamisa.

6. Also, in his sworn response in his affidavit, Chamisa did not dispute Chabangu’s claim that he was authorized to act for CCC by the Interim National Council of CCC. In fact, by not objecting to Chabangu’s request on this matter, Chamisa effectively legally accepts the existence of an interim national council of the CCC and its authority to grant power to Chabangu, as he did.

7. Last but not least, Chamisa says under oath in his game-changing affidavit that he has no offices in Bulawayo and that he was not responsible for the looting done in his name. In other words, he had absolutely nothing to do with who painted the CCC Bulawayo offices blue in his name.

Chamisa’s affidavit to the High Court in Bulawayo is a game-changer in the pending litigation where Chabangu’s position and authority at CCC has been questioned, challenged or disputed. Chamisa has effectively shut down these arguments.

If Chamisa or whoever is the lawyer advising him believes that Chamisa’s effective admissions in his affidavit in the looting case are ordinary “facts” after his resignation last month, they would do well to think again.

All hell is about to break loose! Professor Jonathan Moyo was writing on X





Source link

Previous post NO-ONE WILL DIE OF HUNGER, SAYS ED AS HE HANDS OVER CARS newsdzeZimbabweNewsdzeZimbabwe
Next post SIX DRAGGED TO COURT FOR BEATING UP MADZIBABA AT SHRINE newsdzeZimbabweNewsdzeZimbabwe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *