This morning, the Supreme Court confirmed the High Court’s ruling that nullified Saviour Kasukuwere’s nomination as a presidential candidate for the upcoming general election. However, the court did not provide the reasons for its decision, which it stated will be given at a later time.
Kasukuwere says he is disappointed with the decision and will be making announcements in due course.
Disappointed, and we are now considering our next steps and will keep the nation informed. God bless. Kasukuwere
This is a major blow to him and his team as they had poured in a large amount of money for campaigning including erecting billboards across the country.
He is not the only one who has had his political ambitions have been dashed. LEAD party leader, Linda Musarira also was stopped from contesting after failing to raise the nomination fees on time.
A High Court ruling on July 12th prevented Saviour Kasukuwere from running in the August 23rd elections due to his failure to reside in his constituency for at least 18 months, a violation of the Electoral Act.
Kasukuwere had been in self-imposed exile for over five years and faced legal hurdles in his attempt to run.
The lawsuit was brought by Zanu PF youth, Lovedale Mangwana, who argued that Kasukuwere’s absence from Zimbabwe for 18 months disqualified him from candidacy.
Justice David Mangota delivered the verdict, stating that Kasukuwere could not prove his presence in the country or his constituency, thus disqualifying him from participating in the elections.
“I heard and considered the case of both parties. I am satisfied that the applicant proved his case on a preponderance of probabilities. The application, accordingly, is granted as prayed for in the amended draft order.”
Kasukuwere claimed that he temporarily left the country due to medical reasons, but failed to convince the court.
During the civil case hearing, Kasukuwere’s lawyer Advocate Method Ndlovu was unable to provide dates of his departure and return to Zimbabwe and did not attach a doctor’s report to prove his medical attention outside of the country.
Kasukuwere only submitted an opposing affidavit from South Africa.
Even during the hearing, Kasukuwere was not present in the country or his constituency and had not specified when he would return to Zimbabwe, leaving himself at the mercy of Mangwana.
Justice Mangota ruled that Kasukuwere’s possession of a passport means he could have provided a certified copy of the document to support his claims.