Mliswa calls for amendment of Zimbabwe Constitution to stop recalling of MPs

Over US$100 million was used in the by-elections and it takes about US$5 million for a by-election. How many hospitals, schools and clinics would have been built? Today we lament all the social amenities which are poor but when it comes to one being expelled from the party, the money is there for a by-election. This is taxpayers money. Why have we decided to settle our scores using taxpayers money? This is the reason why I believe that political parties are irrelevant in the modern day politics. What we need are people who will be able to represent people for their tenure which the people would have voted for. Equally, when Section 129(k) is being exercised, the party must not have the final say in the expulsion but the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court must be able to hear both sides. There is no court or justice in political parties. I do not like you – go! Next they fear that they will be arrested in case they want to argue and so forth.

Not many can survive that politics. So it is important that we consider the money which goes towards this. At the same time we cannot have a situation where certain Members of Parliament have been expelled because Government feels it is not their stronghold and it has nothing to do with them, they suspend elections. It cannot work like that. The people in these constituencies are suffering. They need representation. Who is representing them? It is important that it is systematic and consistent the same way that the party was. So determined to have the so-called gamatox which I was said I belong to out of office and have quick by-elections must be seen of the other side because there is no democracy when people are not being represented. The Constitutional Court must have the final say in ensuring that the party constitution was followed and this person needs to be expelled.

It is my fervent hope that in those people who are debating this, if fairness has to prevail, may we not allow this section to rest in political parties but may it rest in the Constitutional Court which would then have a final determination whether one is expelled or not. People must understand that the Speaker is the one who carries the message and of late, there has been a lot of outcry to who expels who. What position should you have in the party? It is not at all written down and it not coming from them. Section 129 (k) does not talk about who has the authority to expel the other. That on its own is a problem and as a result, it has got to be attended in all aspects.

Section 129(k) says “If a member has ceased to belong to a political parties of which he or she was a member when elected in Parliament and the political party concerned, by written notice to the Speaker”. The political party concerned, it is not clear who in the political party has authority because every member of the ruling party from ZANU PF is a member of a cell.  So what about a cell member who writes a letter to say, we want him expelled?  How then do you stop them?

So precedence is set and there has got to be a clear position on who is the authority.  It does not talk about the Constitution and it does not talk about the Secretary-General of the party or the President of the party.  You could see even in South Africa, the ANC Secretary-General wrote a letter expelling the President of the party.  So with the factional fights that happen, factionalism prevails at the end of the day more than constitutionalism and democracy which hurts a country and it becomes very difficult for a country to be united and for Parliament to be united when that happens.  I bemoan Section 129 (1) (k) for it is a stumbling block for the democracy of this country and for the development of this country for politicians.

Continued next page

(313 VIEWS)