Dr Thokozani Khupe has described her recall from Parliament as malicious.


In a statement, her spokesman, Witness Dube said :“MDC-T acting president Hon Dr Thokozani Khupe finds her recall from Parliament as a malicious act of interfering into the internal matters of political party, considering that she had long written to parliament notifying them of a leadership crisis in the party.

This leadership crisis is currently awaiting settlement before the High Court of Zimbabwe, and it is therefore difficult to understand what legal criteria the Parliament of Zimbabwe used in taking sides with another faction of the party. The acting president has instructed her legal counsel to seek legal relief on this matter.”

The Herald said legal analysts were divided yesterday on the legality of Dr Khupe’s expulsion as they now exist two MDCs with the other led by Mr Nelson Chamisa.

Human rights lawyer and lecturer at the University of Zimbabwe Mr Sharon Hofisi said parliament had acted in terms of the law as Dr Khupe had not contested the presidency in a judicial way.

“Dr Khupe has officially left the party. The challenge to Mr Chamisa’s presidency has not been done. The legal challenge to the two vice presidents who were appointed was dismissed on a technicality and as it stands no one has gone back to the courts to put to rest the fact that is Mr Chamisa the legitimate leader of the MDC- T,” he said.

“There is still a chance that Madam Khupe might challenge the MDC-T over the use of the party name. However she has agreed that she has left MDC-T by launching her own party and only indicating that she will use the MDC-T name during the elections. This leaves the institution MDC-T under Chamisa to deal with her in the manner they have done since Chamisa has been endorsed by the party’s national council.”

Mr Obert Gutu challenged Parliament’s decision saying it was not in tandem with the laws of the land.

He said Dr Khupe had since instructed Professor Lovemore Madhuku to legally challenge her recall and said the necessary court papers would be filed at the courts.

Professor Lovemore Madhuku said Parliament was abusing the law.

“The Constitution does not contemplate that a seat of an MP can be so cheap that it can be lost easily. Parliament ought to be more sensitive to the ideals of a democratic society based on the rule of law,” he said.

“It must not take sides. It must leave it to the courts to resolve disputes of this nature. The correct position is that the contestation must first be resolved by the courts before an MP loses his or her seat.”



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.