Two bids by war veterans to challenge CAA3 directly await ConCourt rulings

The applicants, Eliphas Kawa and Hazvineyi Machingura, appeared on 2 November represented by lawyers Tendai Biti and Advocate Lewis Uriri. The amendment extends presidential and parliamentary terms from five to seven years and transfers the election of the president from citizens to Parliament.

Their lawyers argued that the court should hear the matter directly instead of sending the applicants to the High Court, citing fundamental questions about voting rights, the source of public authority and the electoral framework. The applicants intend to argue that CAA3 cannot take away their Section 67 right to elect a president without a referendum.

The court has not ruled on the amendment itself. If direct access is granted, the substantive arguments will be considered later.

The earlier application

The case is separate from an earlier direct-access application by six war veterans, represented by Professor Lovemore Madhuku, which was heard on 22 September. The court also reserved judgment in that matter.

In that case, the State opposed the application, arguing the applicants had not met the requirements for direct access and should first approach the High Court. Its lawyer also said judges and senators under the new framework had already been sworn in and that implementation was under way.

In June, the Constitutional Court dismissed an earlier application by six war veterans and a former legislator, finding it fatally defective. Four other related cases have been removed from the roll pending a decision on how the matters will be consolidated.

The reports reviewed do not say when the court will deliver either ruling, and they do not give the State's position on Monday's application.