[featured_image]
Download
Download is available until [expire_date]
  • Version
  • Download 3
  • File Size 388 KB
  • File Count 1
  • Create Date November 24, 2015
  • Last Updated November 11, 2021

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY HANSARD 24 November 2015 42-23

 PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE

Tuesday, 24th November, 2015

The National Assembly met at a Quarter-past Two O’clock p.m.

PRAYERS

(THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair)

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER

INVITATION TO A CATHOLIC CHURCH SERVICE

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I wish to inform the House that

there will be a Catholic service tomorrow, 25th November, 2015 at 1200 hours in the Senate Chamber.  All members who are Catholics and nonCatholics are invited.

INVITATION TO A POST BUDGET SEMINAR

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I also wish to inform the House

that all members are invited to a Post-Budget Seminar which will be held on Monday, 30th November, 2015 at Pandhari Lodge, from 0830 to 1300 hours.  Buses to Pandhari Lodge will leave Parliament building at 0745 hours.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

HON. RUNGANI:  I move that Orders of the Day, Numbers 1 to 8 be stood over until Order of the Day, Number 9 has been disposed of.

HON. MUKWANGWARIWA:  I second.

Motion put and agreed to.

MOTION

REPORT OF THE PAN AFRICAN PARLIAMENT

HON. A. MNANGAGWA:  Madam Speaker, I rise to move the

motion in my name; that this House takes note of the Report of the Pan African Parliament Session held in Midrand, South Africa, from 4th to 18th October, 2015.

HON. DR. MASHAKADA:  I second.

HON. A. MNANGAGWA:  Madam Speaker, this motion seeks to

highlight the main issues raised during the recently held First Session of the Fourth Parliament of the Pan African Parliament.

The delegation comprised of members of the Zimbabwean

Parliament to the Pan African Parliament including Hon. D.

Chimutengwende, Hon. Ndoro, Hon. Senator Chief Charumbira, Hon. A.

Mnangagwa and Hon. Mashakada.

  1. Introduction

Madam Speaker, the session was held from the 5th October, 2015.  It was opened by the Minister of International Relations in South Africa – Hon. Maite who highlighted the need for continental integration.  The advantages of continental integration …

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Order, order Hon. Members.  I am appealing to you.  Would you please lower down your whispers or else you go to the lobby.

HON. A. MNANGAGWA:  Thank you Madam Speaker.  The

advantage of continental integration is that Africa will be able to speak with one voice, especially in the forthcoming COP 21 conference, which will take place in Paris where developed and developing countries will meet to decide on the climate change policy for the next decade.  Several eminent personalities made goodwill speeches including Speakers and former Speakers of National Parliaments.

  1. Caucuses

The Parliament is divided into regions – South, North, West and East African caucuses.  The Southern African Caucus put in place an interim Bureau which includes myself as the Deputy Chairperson.  The leadership of the caucus is with Zambia.  Elections will be held in May to choose the Bureau of the caucus.

         Madam Speaker, I observed that other regions are more organised than the PAP.  My recommendation is that the SADC Parliamentary Forum should be used to discuss regional matters pertaining to the region before attending the PAP session.  This would synergize the work of the

SADC Forum with that of the PAP.  There was no mention of SADC’s position on many of the issues discussed during the session.  There is need to use the SADC Forum to harmonise positions.  The East African Legislative Assembly has clear policy position on many issues, for example, telecommunications where citizens use one sim card.  So, whilst other regions already have positions, Southern Africa does not have one.

These caucuses must also be used to identify issues that require a regional approach.  In my first meeting, South Africa presented a list of issues which they requested the region to look at.  These issues pertained to them as a country and not as a region.

Madam Speaker, the session covered many issues and reports.  I will highlight some.  The President of PAP, His Excellency, Hon. Roger Dan Nkondo presented an activity report where he highlighted many administrative issues including recruitment of staff and other programmes.  It was clear that the report was factual.  A lot of debate ensued after the presentation.

  1. a) COP 21 and SDGs

The Session agreed that there was a need to rotate the Presidency of the PAP according to regions.  The presentation on COP 21 evoked a lot of reaction.  The PAP agreed that whilst there is need to reduce global emissions, this must be done in a fair and balanced manner and developed countries must be made to fulfill the commitments they made in Rio,

Copenhagen and subsequent summits.  The main question was how we ensure that developing countries can achieve economic growth whilst at the same time reducing greenhouse emissions.

Madam Speaker, in this regard, the Zimbabwean delegation should, where possible, receive all session documents so that we get our Government position and prepare ourselves before the session.

The economic and social committees dealing with issues on SDGs should report regularly to Parliament so that we keep track of how we are doing as a nation.  Many Members of Parliament referred to the need to achieve sustainable development goals to reduce poverty in Africa.

  1. b) Pan African Parliament Revised Protocol

The 23rd Ordinary Session Summit of the African Union concluded in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea on 27th June 2014.  The summit’s Assembly, comprising Heads of State and Government of the African Union, was held from 26th to 27th June, 2014.  The Heads of State and Government adopted a number of key decisions with a view to enhancing the socioeconomic and political development of the continent, notably in the areas of education, health, agriculture, trade and women and youth development.

At the end of its deliberations on the envisaged legislative power of the PAP, the African Union Meeting of Heads of State and Government adopted the Draft Protocol to the Constitutive Act of the African Union on the Pan-African Parliament (PAP), paying particular attention to Article 8(1) (a) and 8(2) as revised.  The meeting agreed that the PAP may exercise legislative powers on the subject areas that the Assembly has approved/proposed model laws in accordance with its Parliamentary mandate.

Madam Speaker, the membership of the PAP shall comprise five members elected by each State Party.  At least two of the elected members shall be women.  A delegation which does not satisfy this requirement shall not have the right to be accredited for representation in the Parliament.  The representation of each State Party must reflect the diversity of political opinions in each national Parliament or other deliberative bodies.

The elections of Members of the PAP by the national Parliaments or other deliberative bodies shall be conducted as far as possible in the same month throughout the Member States as may be decided by the Assembly.

Hon. Members having been making discussions on top of their voices.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, order Hon. Members

please.  You are making noise, I think you can even hear the noise yourselves.  That Hon. Member in a green shirt, I can hear your voice from where I am.  Hon. Member, can you please proceed.

HON. A. MNANGAGWA: Thank you Madam Speaker.  Until a

code is developed for election to the Pan African Parliament by direct universal suffrage, the procedure for election to the Pan African Parliament shall be determined by the national Parliament or other deliberative body of each Member State.  A Member of a national Parliament or other deliberative body is eligible to contest an election to the Pan African Parliament.

Madam Speaker, the term of a Member of the Pan African Parliament shall be five years.  He or she shall be eligible for re-election for one further term only.  The term of a Member of the PAP shall commence from the date on which he or she is sworn into office and shall end on the last day of the term of the Parliament.

Madam Speaker, the implementation of the revised PAP Protocol is however, subject to the signing and ratification by the requisite number of States before coming into force.  At least 28 African Parliaments should ratify the instrument to enable it to come into force.  To date, only Mali and Mauritania have signed the amended Protocol.  This is despite the fact that the PAP is situated in Southern Africa.  Zimbabwe did not even sign the Protocol.  Other countries have at least signed and have commenced ratification.  These include: Swaziland, Ghana, Senegal, Malawi,

Cameroon, Sierra Leone, Mozambique and Western Sahara.  Only Parliaments which have ratified will continue their membership when the Protocol comes into effect.

Madam Speaker, it is recommended that our committee dealing with issues of international protocols and laws and international cooperation, study and make recommendations so that we know whether to advocate for the ratification of the Protocol or not.  My recommendation is that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should advise us on all the African Union Instruments that our President signed so that we decide on ratification and ultimately domestication.

Madam Speaker, the Women’s Conference dealt with issues of access to wealth, women empowerment, Human and People’s Rights on the rights of women. The Maputo Protocol provided the legal framework for the discussions.

The Maputo Protocol guarantees rights to women including the right to take part in the political processes, to control their reproductive health and advocates the ending of female genital mutilation and child marriages.  Madam Speaker, I have a DVD that I think Hon. Members can watch so that they can encourage our people on the benefits of the Zimbabwe Agenda for Sustainable Socio-Economic Transformation (ZIM ASSET).  I thank you.

DVD played as Hon. Members watched.

HON. DR. MASHAKADA: Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise to second the motion moved by Hon. A. Mnangagwa on the deliberations of the Pan African Parliament which were held in October this year in Midrand, South Africa. Madam Speaker, before I delve into the discussions I think it is important for Hon. Members in this House to appreciate where the Pan African Parliament is coming from, what it is, and where it is going.

We know that the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) was established in 1963 to carry forward the agenda of “One Africa, One

Voice”. Since 1963 when the OAU was formed to bring Africa together to improve the welfare of Africans, economically and socially, the OAU has mutated. It is now called the African Union (AU) which was established by the founding fathers like Julius Nyerere and Kwame Nkrumah and other African luminaries. For Africa to speak with one voice, the AU has got so many organs. One of the organs of the AU is called the People and Human Rights Courts which makes sure that democratic governance and human rights in Africa are promoted. The other organ of the AU is the Pan African e-University to promote tertiary and higher education. The other programme of the AU is the NEPAD. NEPAD is Africa’s economic development programme, just as good as Zimbabwe has got ZIM ASSET.

The AU has got NEPAD as its own programme.

The other institution created by the AU is then the Pan African

Parliament. I thought I should give this context so that Hon. Members can appreciate where I am coming from. The Pan African Parliament is the Parliament for the whole of Africa. Its duty is to make sure that all AU member states are monitored and there is oversight on the economic, social programmes and policies of the AU countries for the welfare of African people. That is the role of the Pan African Parliament – to provide continental oversight in all African countries. As you know Africa has about 54 countries. Imagine a Parliament which has to oversee governance, political and economic issues in all the 54 countries of Africa.

I think the Pan African Parliament is an important institution.

What was discussed at the last session were the following; the first thing which Hon. A. Mnangagwa has referred to is the Revised Protocol of the Pan African Parliament. When the Pan African Parliament was set, it did not have legislative powers. It was an advisory body which did not have full parliamentary powers. At the last session it was discussed that it was important for all 54 member countries to ratify the revised protocol which would give the Pan African Parliament legislative powers rather than advisory or a body which makes recommendations.

The challenge we have as a country is that our President is the Chair of the African Union which is the mother body of the Pan African Parliament. It does not give a good image that Zimbabwe has not ratified the Revised Protocol of the Pan African Parliament to give legislative powers to this organisation. I would urge the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cabinet to make sure that Zimbabwe ratifies this revised protocol which gives Pan African Parliament legislative powers because tinoita chiseko chenyika kuti ndimi muno cheya African Union but you do not lead by example.

The other issue that was discussed in the last session is the COP 21 which is going to be held in Paris from 30 November to 11 December 2015 on climate change. As you know you cannot talk about sustainable development without talking about the impact of climate in Africa. If you look at the droughts that are affecting Africa, the rise in the sea levels and coastal areas, deforestation and desertification, all those things are caused by climate change. As a Parliament, the Pan African Parliament had to discuss what Africa should go and talk about in Paris. As you know when you go to Paris to the climate change, there is the Asian group, there is an African group and the European group - so, the African group must speak with one voice on the impact of climate change.

Africa is on the receiving end of climate change. We are concerned about mitigation and adaptation of the impact of climate change but mind you, the greatest polluters are China and United States. Those are the greatest global polluters of the ozone layer but they do not take responsibility on mitigation. So, Africa is going to argue in Paris that the developed countries must carry the cross. They must fund climate finance, mitigation and adaptation for African countries and also the question of compensation to loss and damage caused by global warming – is one thing that is going to feature in Paris. This was a very topical issue that was discussed by the Pan African Parliament and a decisive recommendation was made to the AU for Africa to take up these issues in Paris regarding reduction of global emissions, mitigation adaptation and the question of climate finance.

The other issue that was discussed is the establishment of a

Continental Free Trade for Africa by 2017.  The idea is that by the year

2017, Africa should remove all barriers to trade, all tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade, must be removed so that the flow of goods and services and the movement of people across borders in Africa is improved, that we promote intra-African trade.

As you know Madam Speaker, it is a paradox that Africa among itself, the volume of trade among African countries is only 12%, whereas Africa trades more with Europe and China than among ourselves as African countries.  So, the establishment of a Continental Free Trade Area will ensure that Africa trades more within itself, thereby creating jobs, reduce poverty and create linkages that will lead to regional integration.

So, it was very topical that by 2017, this goal of a Continental Free Trade Area will be established.

The other issue which Hon. A. Mnangagwa referred to was the

Maputo Protocol which is Africa’s voice on the rights of women, the empowerment of all women in Africa.  It was considered that 2015 is a year of women empowerment that was the resolution of the Pan African Parliament.  In terms of the Maputo Protocol, women must be involved in decision making, in the public sector, private sector and Government levels – [HON. MEMNBERS: Hear, hear.]-  So, it was a very important recommendation and it was thought that the Maputo Protocol should be complied with by all African countries to make sure that women are uplifted.

The other issue that was discussed is Africa’s vision 2063.  There is an economic blueprint called Africa 2063 – the Africa we want. How do we raise Africa from its poverty trap? How does Africa create jobs, how will Africa deal with migration, refuges and internal conflict? What priority infrastructural projects can Africa embark on?  One of the major projects of Africa 2063 is the railway line that will run from Ethiopia to South Africa, linking all other African countries along the way that will promote regional integration.

So, in terms of Africa’s development, the Pan African Parliament and the AU are of the view that Africa needs to promote cross boarder or cross country project that benefits the whole region not just a single country.

Madam Speaker, the other issue that was discussed was the question of sustainable development goals.  The MDG’s expired in 2015 and now

Africa has to implement the new sustainable development goals.  Whereas the MDG’s were only 8 targets which were not fulfilled, this time the sustainable goals are 17.  So, if Africa could not achieve 8 goals what more of 17, so it is a tall order.  These are the issues which the African Union should be seized with and the Pan African Parliament is there to make oversight and make sure that these policies and programmes are implemented by African countries. I thank you.

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER

LIAISON AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, I would like to inform all

Chairpersons that there will be a Liaison and Coordination Committee meeting tomorrow Wednesday, 25th November, at 0900hrs in the Senate Chamber.  All Portfolio Committee Chairpersons are urged to attend.

HON. CHASI: Thank you very much Madam Speaker.   I wish to start by congratulating Hon.  A. Mnangagwa for a very lucid presentation on this trip that they conducted to represent us.  I also want to thank Hon.

Mashakada for the additional information which was quite illuminating.  Hon. Speaker, I am personally concerned, first of all at the apparent lack of interest by Members in this House in this report which I think is of paramount importance.   The report that has been given to us indicates that Pan African Parliament is working towards supra national law making powers which I think is a matter that must be of concern to this House, to say that this development needs to be studied very closely as it impinges on the powers that this House has.

I am also concerned by the lack of coordination internally in Zimbabwe; Hon. A. Mnangagwa indicated that when they traveled they did not have Government positions on various situations.  I think that is a most unwholesome situation because it would be completely embarrassing if our representative speak along lines that are completely different from the position that Zimbabwe has on a number of matters.  I also think that there needs to be a deliberate exercise to synchronise the work that is happening around PAP and also the work that is happening around SADC to ensure that we are moving purposefully in unison and with one voice in both bodies.

There has been talk of membership of PAP and I want to say that in making the decision to second members to the Pan African Parliament, I think we must deliberately look at the skills, particularly international relations skills and choose persons who have an understanding of how international organisations work.  I support the need to have the protocol signed but I also want to add a word of caution to say that we need to study this protocol and make a very deliberate decision to append our signature to this protocol.

Now, regional intergration is a reality which we cannot avoid and I think it is absolutely necessary that we must examine our positions in the various regional organisations that we work with that are SADC,

COMESA et-cetera. I think that the intention to establish –[HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] - Madam Speaker, I cannot even hear myself speak.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order Hon. Members! I think

this is a very important debate, those who have gone to Pan African Parliament are reporting back and you are busy talking.  They are bringing very important issues for us to consider but we are very busy talking.  I do not know whether we come here to talk amongst ourselves or to debate issues concerning the whole country. I think Hon. Members you have to be very serious on these things.

HON. CHASI: Thank you very much Madam Chair.  I was just referring to the Continental Free Trade Area which seems to be upon us in the next two years.  I want to emphasise the need for us to co-ordinate with the relevant Government ministries, to ensure that what is happening at Pan African Parliament (PAP is in sync with what Government is working on.  I am not quite sure of our state of preparedness for this but it seems to me that the time that we are left with is very little, two years to work towards this, given that we have also memberships in other regional arrangements.

Obviously, some of the regional bodies are also working towards some of these goals.  As Parliament, we need to engage economists who understand the implications of these things so that we take informed positions.  The Maputo Protocol is very important.  Our Constitution is very clear on the need for gender equality.  I think we need to consciously understand what this Protocol means and also synchronise it with our Constitution – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] – On that note, I wish to close my comments.

HON. MPARIWA:  Thank you Hon. Speaker.  Let me begin by thanking Hon. Mnangagwa and Hon. Mashakada for this very important report to the House on the feedback in terms of the goings-on at the PAP.  I was one of those who were assigned to go to the PAP from its inception in 2004.  I had the privilege of being invited there, having been in the first Women’s Parliamentary Caucus of the PAP.

Let me also thank Africa for having taken a deliberate effort in terms of addressing women’s issues through the Maputo Protocol, in terms of human and peoples’ rights.  Women’s rights are also human rights and more importantly, when we are gathered as women Parliamentarians from across Africa – I will cite for example, Hon. Speaker, when you talked about wealth for women.  How many women are rich and how many women are in poverty?  I have always heard women talk that the face of poverty wears a woman and that is correct.  Hence, the deliberate attempt by the leadership of the PAP to talk about how we can improve wealth amongst women in Africa is a genuine one and I would like to support and congratulate the PAP and our delegation to the PAP who did an excellent job in terms of team work in talking and sharing with other women.

When you talk of women empowerment, you also find that women are excluded all over Africa, Zimbabwean women included.  If we do not talk about it, we will leave the women out.  When we talk about the Maputo Protocol signing, I want to diverse a little bit and say, when we sign these Protocols we need to domesticate them.  If we do not domesticate them, to design them according to our programmes, they will not be as effective and efficient to address our needs as Zimbabweans – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] – After domestication, there is the issue of implementation which is the biggest problem.  If you do not implement when you have domesticated or ratified a Convention, you have not done anything in terms of action.

I would call upon our Executive actually to implement the Protocols that we would have signed, especially the Maputo Protocol since it addresses the issues of women’s wealth, rights and empowerment.  I am saying this with the knowledge that we have a privilege and an advantage that the Chairperson of the AU is His Excellency, the President of Zimbabwe.  We can actually benefit from his tenure of office by doing us fast track in terms of domesticating and implementing.

Hon. Chiota having stood at the House entrance.

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, order! Hon. Chiota, you are up, is there any problem?[AN HON. MEMBER: Arikutopinda.] –       He has been standing there for quite some minutes.

HON. MPARIWA: Having said that, I am talking about this at a time when I know that at least the current Chairperson of the AU is a

Zimbabwean and the President of Zimbabwe.  He can do a favour to the Zimbabweans in terms of domesticating, implementing and supervising those ministries that are to do with any issues to do with women.  Specifically, you can come to the Portfolio Committee on Women.  You can also go to the Portfolio Committee on Labour because there are a lot of aspects that also get to women.  We talk of decent work, equality at work, et cetera, women’s health at the work place and sexual harassment.  All those issues are pregnant of issues that we can improve upon whilst the President of Zimbabwe is still the Chairperson of AU.  I want to believe that when Zimbabweans start, Africa also can shake because the

Chairperson will have walked the talk.

My last point is on the equality of women in politics, that is political equality in terms of men and women.  This is also enshrined in our Constitution but when Instruments and Protocols pronounce them, let us also take advantage that we are also part of the AU.  We cannot just watch and say, it is contained in our Constitution.  I know there is a deliberate push – just to push aside women’s issues because it is also part of the Constitution.  We have not aligned the laws to the Constitution hence we can actually start with the Maputo Protocol.

Whilst there are 400 pieces of legislation that are supposed to come into this House, we do not know when but we can take advantage of the recommendations that have been put through by our delegation from the PAP.  I want to thank you for a job well done.

*HON. MAPIKI: Thank you Hon. Speaker for giving me this opportunity to add my voice on this motion. I would like to thank Hon. Mnangagwa and her delegation for this report.  This shows that we have a visionary President who was aware of the fact that we would come to these things.  We have a President who launched the programme on irrigation using equipment from Brazil.  In this irrigation scheme, we are using equipment which came from Israel.  He is also promoting the small grains.  Our President is visionary because he is aware of the climate changes and hence takes precautionary measures to win this war on climate change.

We also realise that His Excellency, the President has put in a strategic response to the Climatic Change Programme.  He is also promoting the programme of irrigation and also making a hybrid of cattle so that we have cattle or draught power which can stand the drought which will be coming because of this climate change.  We also see that our President and the Chairperson of the AU is a pro-active man, an intelligent man who is leading by example, other countries of Africa.  May I also thank members of this august House who worked on a board which is looking at the climatic change and this group will be part of the team which will go to Paris to represent Zimbabwe on this subject and it will show that Zimbabwe is a country which is prepared to discuss and tackle climatic change.  We are also aware of the fact that our President will be going to Paris, France to discuss this issue.

We realise that in this report, there was backing of resources on

COMESA so that there can be intra-trade amongst African countries and removal of the barriers that affect trade amongst Africans.  We have about 12 countries which are in Africa that are discussing cross border traders, such as those who will be moving from Zimbabwe to Tanzania through Zambia and Libya.  These should operate on a simplified trade regime form where they will import goods worth $500, which are imported duty free.  In that manner, we will be removing the barriers of trade amongst African countries.  We know there are some African countries which are skeptical about this idea of COMESA.  They are about 12 of them.  I am sure these countries will soon realise that they should join the bandwagon.

We have noticed that South Africa is now taking measures to join the COMESA trade pact.

We also have other countries which are now operating to look at the climate change.  These are countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo which have rivers that can generate enough electricity.  We need to have a union of these countries such as Inga in DRC so that when we have enough electricity, we can distribute it.  In countries like Zimbabwe, we have plenty of sunshine and we can start looking for ways of using solar system.  We can also drill boreholes using solar energy.  When we are running short of the energy, we then import from the DRC.  We can also borrow irrigation schemes from Israel whereby the drip irrigation scheme saves water but brings in a lot of harvests.

I praise the people who went on this mission as they showed that definitely, Zimbabwe is well educated because they are pro-active.  We look at transportation whereby we have countries which were in the federation of Northern, Southern Rhodesia and Nyasaland.  These countries built a very strong transport infrastructure, whereby the rail would move to the sea and even go to Tanzania.  These countries realised that they needed to be independent and not rely on other countries for this.

I therefore thank Hon. Mnangagwa and Hon. Mashakada.  They have a foresight and are intelligent people.  They have brought us ideas which we can implement so that we have progress in Zimbabwe.  We should really appreciate what they have brought into our country.  As Members of Parliament, when we go back to our constituencies, let us hold meetings and educate our constituents on climate change.  We should promote drip irrigation and the growing of small grains. We have other crops which can grow within two months and we have some crops which can do well with a very short rainy season.  As Zimbabweans, let us share ideas with the rural people so that we uplift our standards of living using the meager resources that we have.  I thank you.

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA):  I move that the debate do now adjourn.

Motion put and agreed to.

Debate to resume:  Wednesday, 25th November, 2015.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA):  I move that Orders of the Day, Numbers 10 to 19 be stood over until Orders of the Day, Numbers 1 and 2 are disposed of.

Motion put and agreed to.

RECOMMITTAL TO COMMITTEE STAGE

GENERAL LAWS AMENDMENT BILL, 2015 [H. B. 2A, 2015]

First Order read:  Recommittal – Committee:  General Laws Amendment Bill, (H. B. 2A, 2015).

House in Committee.

On Part 1:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): I move the amendment standing in my name; with

regard to Part 1, under the Interpretation Act, on Page 2 of the Bill, in Section 2, interpretation, insert new Subsection g, h, i and j in between lines 24 and 25 as follows; By the repeal of the definition of

Administrative Court and substitution of the following, Administrative

Court means Administrative Court referred to in Section 173 of the Constitution.

Under h, by the repeal of the definition of Police Force and substitution of the following; Police Service, means the Police Service referred to in Section 219 of the Constitution.  Under i, by the repeal of the definition of Public Service and the substitution of the following; Civil

Service, means Civil Service referred to in Section 199 of the Constitution.

Under j, by the repeal of the definition of Public Service Commission and substitution of the following; Civil Service Commission, means Civil Service Commission, referred to in Section 202 of the Constitution.

Amendment to Part 1 put and agreed to.

Part 1, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part VI:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): I move the amendment standing in my name that; under Part VI Mr. Chairman, on page 9 of the Bill, in between line 30 and

31, insert the following paragraph after paragraph C, which is D; Mandatory, automatic and electronic voter registration.

Amendment of Part VI put and agreed to.

Part VI, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part XX:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chairman, I move the amendment standing in my

name that; in relation to Part XX, on page 22 of the Bill, line 3, delete subsection 2(a) and substitute with the following; Where extramarital sexual intercourse or an indecent act occurs between young persons who are both over the age of 12 years but below the age of 16 years at the time of the sexual intercourse or the indecent act, one of them shall be charged with sexual intercourse or performing an indecent act with a young person except upon a report of a probation officer appointed in terms of the

Children’s Act, Chapter 5:06, showing that it is inappropriate to charge either of them with a crime.

Amendment to Part XX put and agreed to.

Part XX, as amended put and agreed to.

On Part CIX:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chairman, I move the amendment standing in my name.  This amendment relates to the University of Zimbabwe Act.  The same amendment which was proposed by Hon. Members here applies to the University of Zimbabwe Act, Zimbabwe Open University Act,

Midlands State University Act, Bindura University of Science and

Education Act, Chinhoyi University of Technology Act, Great Zimbabwe

University Act, Lupane State University Act and Harare Institute of Technology Act.

The amendment is similar.  On page 55 in line 35, by the insertion of the following words, after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.  The same applies under Zimbabwe Open University on page 56 in line 26, by the insertion of the following words after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.  The same applies to Midlands State University, but under page 57 and line 3, by the insertion of the following words after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.

Mr. Chairman, the same applies on Bindura University of Science Education Act, but it is on page 57, in line 29, by the insertion of the following words, after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.  The same applies to Chinhoyi University of Technology Act, on page 58, in line 4, by the insertion of the following words after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.  Similarly, under Great Zimbabwe University Act, on page 58 in line 28, by the insertion of the following words after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.  Lupane State University Act the same, but on page 59, in line 4, by the insertion of the following words after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.  The same is under Harare Institute of Technology Act, on page 58 in line 4, by the insertion of the following words after the word women, and fair regional representation is achieved.

Amendment to Part CIX put and agreed to.

Part CIX, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXII:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): I move the amendment standing in my name;  that on page 56 in line 35, by the insertion of the following words after the word

“women” “and fair regional representation is achieved”.

Amendment to Part CXII put and agreed to.

Part CXII, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXIII:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chair, I move the amendment standing in my

name; that on page 57 in line 3, by the insertion of the following words after the word “women” “and fair regional representation is achieved”.

Amendment to Part CXIII put and agreed to.

Part CXIII, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXIV:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chair, I move the amendment standing in my name that; on page 57 in line 29 by the insertion of the following words after the word “women” “and fair regional representation is achieved”.

Amendment to Part CXIV put and agreed to.

Part CXIV, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXV:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chair, I move the amendment standing in my

name; that on page 58 in line 4, by insertion of the following words after the word “women” “and fair regional representation is achieved.

Amendment to Part CXV put and agreed to.

Part CXV, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXVI:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chair, I move the amendment standing in my name; that on page 58 in line 28, by the insertion of the following words after the word “women” “and fair regional representation is achieved”.

Amendment to Part CXVI put and agreed to.

Part CXVI, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXVII:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chair, I move the amendment standing in my name; that on page 59 in line 4, by the insertion of the following words after the word “women” “and fair regional representation if achieved”.

Amendment to Part CXVII put and agreed to.

Part CXVII, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Part CXVIII:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): Mr. Chair, I move the amendment standing in my

name; that on page 58 in line 4, by the insertion of the following words after the word “women” “and fair regional representation is achieved”.

Amendment to Part CXVIII put and agreed to.

Part CXVIII, as amended, put and agreed to.

House resumed.

Bill reported with amendments.

Bill referred to the Parliamentary Legal Committee.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER (HON. DZIVA): I have an

announcement to make. The Ford Ranger which is white in colour,

Registration Number ADA-3042, can the owner of the vehicle remove his car as it is blocking other vehicles [AN HON MEMBER: Ndeya Mphoko].

Hon. Mutseyami, can you please withdraw your statement?

HON. MUTSEYAMI: Ndemedza mashoko angu andareketa.

Zvadarika.

RECOMMITTAL TO COMMITTEE STAGE

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE AMENDMENT

BILL [H. B. 3A, 2015]

Second Order read: Recommittal Committee Stage: Criminal

Procedure and Evidence Amendment Bill 2015 [H.B. 3A, 2015].

House in Committee.

On Clauses 6:

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. E. D.

MNANGAGWA): The substitution of Clause 6 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Amendment Bill. On page 5 of the Bill, delete clause 6 from lines 23 to 32 and substitute the following—

6 New section substituted for section 16 of Cap. 9:07

Section 16 of the principal Act is repealed and the following is substituted—

 

“16 Certificate of Prosecutor-General that he or she declines to prosecute

  • Except as is provided by subsection (4), it shall not be competent for any private party to obtain the process of any court for summoning any party to answer any charge, unless such private party produces to the officer authorized by law to issue such process a certificate signed by the Prosecutor-General that he or she has seen the statements or affidavits on which the charge is based and declines to prosecute at the public instance, and, subject to the conditions set forth in subsections (2) and (3), in every case in which the Prosecutor-General declines to prosecute he or she shall, at the request of the party intending to prosecute, grant the certificate required.
  • The Prosecutor-General shall grant the certificate referred to in subsection (1) if—

(a) there is produced to him or her by the private party a written

request in the form of a sworn statement from which it appears to the Prosecutor-General that the private party—

  • is the victim of the alleged offence, or is otherwise an

interested person by virtue of having personally suffered, as a direct consequence of the alleged offence,  an invasion of a legal right beyond that suffered by the public generally; and

  • has the means to conduct the private prosecution promptly

and timeously;  and

  • will conduct the private prosecution as an individual (whether personally or through his or her legal practitioner), or as the representative of a class of individuals recognised as a class for the purposes of the

Class Actions Act [Chapter 8:17] (No. 10 of 1999);

and

(b) no grounds exist in terms of subsection (3) for withholding the

certificate.

(3)  The Prosecutor-General may refuse to grant the certificate referred to in subsection (1) upon any one or more of the following grounds,

namely—

  • That the conduct complained of by the private party does not disclose a criminal offence; or
  • That on the evidence available, there is no possibility (or only a remote possibility) of proving the charge against the accused beyond a  reasonable doubt:

Provided that if the private party has any additional evidence that was not availed to the Prosecutor-General at the time when he or she  declined to prosecute the case, the private party shall disclose the nature  of that evidence in his or her request to the Prosecutor-General made in  terms of subsection (2) (and any failure to do so shall constitute the  offence of defeating or obstructing the course of justice contrary to

Section 184 of the Criminal Law Code); or

  • that on the facts alleged, there is a civil remedy available to the private party that will meet the justice of his or her case equally well or better; or
  • whether the person to be prosecuted has adequate means to conduct a defence to the charge (in the case of a person who, but for the fact that the Prosecutor-General has declined to prosecute him or her, would have qualified for legal assistance at the expense of the State); or
  • that it is not in the interests of national security or the public interest generally to grant the certificate to the private party.

(4) When the right of prosecution referred to in this Part is possessed under any statute by any public body or person in respect of particular offences, subsections (1), (2) and (3) shall not apply.”

HON. MAJOME: Thank you Chair.  I rise to register concern and

infact, an objection to subsection (3) of Clause 16, actually starting from Clause 2, Clause 16 sub clauses (2), paragraph (b) as it effectively is inherently contradicting to subsection 2.

Hon. Chairperson, subsection (2), provides that the Prosecutor General is required to grant a certificate of non-prosecution.  It is couched in peremptory terms. The Prosecutor-General must issue such a certificate of non prosecution where the Prosecutor-General decides not to prosecute.

However, if you read on to sub clause (b), on last page of Clause 6, 13 it makes a total U-turn, total reversal and contradicts totally to the peremptory effect of the Prosecutor-General having to issue such statement.  Now, in sub clause (3), it provides that the Prosecutor-General may refuse to grant the certificate which is the total opposite of what has been said in sub Clause (2).

So, Hon. Chairperson, even from a drafting point of view, in terms of drafting of statues and of any documents, surely they cannot reside in one document, positions and statement that totally contradict each other.  It is difficult to make sense of it as to which it is that will prevail.  If the Prosecutor-General is required to issue a certificate of non-prosecution as he shall, as indicated in sub clause 2, how then may he do so?  He or she cannot have discretion to refuse to grant it if he is required to do so.  What this in fact amounts to, is that it is a claw back.  That means that the section is purporting to recognise the right of individuals to have the protection of the law in terms of the Constitution where the Prosecutor-

General does not want to prosecute.

However, it then goes around the back door and totally removing everything.  If that is the intention of the Hon. Vice President who is responsible for the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, to make sure that people do not have a right to prosecute, possibly we should save words, space and time, just to indicate that the Prosecutor General can refuse to grant a certificate.  It is contradictory but worse, it is giving the Prosecutor-General judicial functions.

In sub clause 3, it is actually giving the Prosecutor-General the right to decide whether or not a person’s issue should disclose a criminal offence.  Secondly, it is also going further to give the Prosecutor General the power to weigh evidence, adjudge evidence and decides whether such evidence, there is a possibility or a remote possibility of a conviction.

That Mr. Chairman is a sole prerogative of the Judiciary.

In terms of Section 102 of the Constitution, the only judicial authority is the courts.  Section 162 says that Judicial authority derives from the people of Zimbabwe and it vests in the courts and it lists the Constitutional Court, the High Court, the Supreme Court, the Labour

Court and any other courts that are provided.  The Prosecutor General,

Hon Chairperson, is not a court of law and should not be a court of law.  This violates the very core principle of separation of powers that is central to the rule of law.

This clause is not constitutional and it is in fact, not lawful.  It violates the Constitution by removing that opportunity for those who are victims of crime but who the Prosecutor-General does not want to prosecute on whose behalf.  It deprives them of any remedy whatsoever. It should be up to the courts to do so and it contradicts what is already in Subsection (2).  Those are my humble submissions Hon. Chair.

HON. ZIYAMBI: Thank you Mr. Chairman.  I rise to support some

of the points that Hon. Majome has raised.  If you look at Sections 2 and 3, they are contradictory.  Section 3 says that the Prosecutor General may refuse to grant on two grounds:-

  • If the conduct complained about does not disclose a criminal offence;
  • On the evidence available there is no possibility of proving the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Hon. Chairperson,   this is the function of the Prosecutor-General. Before he takes any case to the courts, he has to ensure that there is a possibility that he is going to get a conviction.  The moment he notices that there is no case, he refuses. Now, when the Prosecutor-General has refused to prosecute and an aggrieved party feels that he has a chance to adduce evidence which may lead to a conviction, the Prosecutor General then cannot turn around and say no, I have already indicated that there is no evidence and therefore, I am refusing.  The grounds for refusing to prosecute except if it refers to subsection (e), which I agree with and which says that if it is in the national interest, security interest or public interest, the Prosecutor General may refuse to prosecute but if it does not confine to those areas, surely we are giving the Prosecutor General a lot of powers to refuse arbitrarily and there will not be any justice that will have been done.

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGANGWA): Thank you Mr. Chairman. I see that the two lawyers have hurriedly stood up before they finalised the construction of the provision.  With regard to subsection two, it says “the Prosecutor- General shall grant the certificate referred to in subsection one, if – the ‘if’ derogates ‘shall’.   I rest my case on that one.

We move on to the next one which the Hon. Member Ziyambi also got lost, dealing with Section 3, both the two lawyers also got lost.  The

Prosecutor-General may refuse to grant ‘may’ not ‘shall’ the certificate referred to in subsection 1, upon any one or more of the following grounds, namely: (a) that the Conduct complained of by the private party does not disclose a criminal offence that is inherent in the functions of the

Prosecutor General,

(b) that on the evidence available, there is no possibility again that is inherent in the functions of the Prosecutor General.

However, there a proviso which the two lawyers were not able to connect.  There is a proviso to those two provisions.  The proviso says,

‘provided that if the private party has any additional evidence which had not been adduced to the Prosecutor-General at the time determined not to prosecute has now been adduced.  So the proviso provides what the Prosecutor-General has to do.  So, there is no contradiction at all when you read them properly.  I thank you.

Amendments to Clause 6 put and agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, put and agreed to.

HON. MARIDADI: I think you are making it a tradition that when you say those of the opinion say ‘aye’ and those of the contrary opinion say ‘no’, you are quick to say ‘the ayes have it’.  How do you know that the ‘ayes’ have it because you did not measure the decibels.?

HON. MUTSEYAMI: On a point of order.  My point of order is the ayes and noes, the echoes were equally the same.  How did you manage to devise a means that this was higher?  What system are you using?  – HON.

MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE CHAIRPERSON: Order! I am the Chairperson, I have ears.

On Clause 30: 

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): Section 121 (“Appeals against decisions regarding bail”) on the principal Act is amended –

(a)      by the repeal of subsection (1) and substitution of –

“(1)  Subject to this section where a judge or magistrate has  admitted or refused to admit a person to bail –

  • the Prosecutor-General or the Public- Prosecutor, within 72 hours of the decision; or
  • The person concerned, at any time; may appeal against the admission to or refusal to or amount fixed as bail or any conditions imposed in connection with bail”,
  • by the repeal of subsection (3) and the substitution of –

“(3) Where a judge or magistrate has admitted a person to bail  and the judge or magistrate is notified immediately after the decision that the Prosecutor-General or a Public- Prosecutor wishes to appeal against the decision, the judge or magistrate shall order the person to remain in custody until the appeal determined:

Provided that the person shall not remain in custody under such an order for longer than 72 hours unless, within that period, the Prosecutor-

General or Public -Prosecutor lodges the appeal”.

( c) In subsection (6), by the deletion of “subsections (2) to (6) of

Section 116” and substitution of Section 117 (2) to (6)”.

HON. MAJOME: Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir.  I rise to object to the amendment of the notorious Section 121 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act.  I rise with a lot of sadness because I believe we have made a tremendous amount of progress in this country in the sense that our Constitutional Courts have ruled very clearly and unequivocally that the provisions of Section 121 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, that allow a person who has been duly granted bail by a court of law, that has duly weighed the circumstances of the accused person; it has weighed the interest of justice; the risk of escape or other factors and has decided to grant a person bail.  Then the Public- Prosecutor stands up and simply indicates that -‘I want to appeal’.  There and then, the bail is suspended,

the person is sent back into custody for seven days.

Our courts have ruled that, that practice is patently unconstitutional.  It violates the very basic principles of natural justice.  It also violates the principles of our Constitution.  We have been encouraged previously when this Bill was debated that the Hon. Vice President, the esteemed Vice President who is responsible for the Ministry of Justice, Legal and

Parliamentary Affairs, I heard that he had indeed looked at the issue from a judiciary’s point of view, from a point of view that respects and recognises the need to dispense justice in each and every case and he had moved somewhat down to 48 hours. In my respectful view, he had recognised that indeed, it is a travesty of justice to revoke a person’s right to freedom and bail granted by a court merely because the prosecutor says that he is thinking about appealing.  Usually, they do not even do so.  Even when they do so and had been reduced to 48, which in my respectful view is still problematic because it still amounts to the same thing of interfering with a person’s right that they had been given by a court of law because a Public- Prosecutor does not have judicial authority.  They will be overriding the decision of a duly constituted court and violating the same authority in Section 162 of the Constitution which provides that the judicial authority vests in the people of Zimbabwe and is exercised with the courts.

The Prosecutor- General and any of his officers are not the courts of Zimbabwe; they are not listed anywhere in Section 162.  They are not endowed with the authority to decide on matters.  Once people go before the courts, they are equal.  No animal is more equal than another animal when parties are before the courts.  This practice of giving the upper hand to the Prosecutor-General to decide singlehandedly literally overrides the decision of a magistrate.  It is unconscionable and it is very sad indeed.  It will be a very sad day for justice again.  If we were to wind back the progress we have made and go back now even to the 76 hours because even the 48 hours is objectionable.  It quarrels fundamentally with the basic principle of justice and natural justice.

What is more worrying is that it breeds inefficiency in the conduct of prosecutors.  Why cannot the Prosecutor-General’s officers act with alacrity, speed and efficiency?  If they want to file appeals, why do they drag their feet?  Why are we legislating for inefficiency and ineptitude on their part?  Surely, if they are meant to prosecute, they must behave like any other lawyer.  They must do what they are required to do on behalf of their client in the time available; that is what they exist for. Surely Hon. Chairperson, this particular amendment to even raise it back to 76 hours is a hard slap again in the face of the Judiciary, which is what the

Constitution gives authority to decide over matters.

It is also giving licence to the Prosecutor General to continue abusing this provision because when Hon. Chief Justice Chidyausiku ruled in the recent matter, he actually ruled that this provision is sadistic.  It is more sadistic than legal.  It will be a sad day for justice and for the people of Zimbabwe Mr. Speaker Sir.  If again in this Legislature, we legislate such sadism.  Even if it is now 76 hours, it is still a travesty of justice and it is unconscionable.  Surely we can do better than this as a Legislature.  We will be actually encouraging the Prosecutor General to act professionally, efficiently and with speed.  As the credo says, justice delayed is justice denied.

No prosecutor however loud voiced should be able to overturn the decision of a duly constituted court that is established in terms of the Constitution.  The Prosecutor General in a criminal trial is only one of the parties.  The Prosecutor General is not more equal than any other litigant.  Where a court has ruled, let us respect the decisions of the court.  Where a court does grant bail, let that be respected. If the Prosecutor General is successful in a bail application in an appeal, the accused person can still be brought back to custody.  Bail conditions can actually be issues that are severe that allow the person to be close by such that if the ProsecutorGeneral does succeed in appealing and which they never do sadly; they hardly ever succeed in the appeals that they do. Then they can be sent back to court than to stand in the way of the established rights of persons, particularly those who are yet to be convicted of any criminal offence because they are still presumed innocent until they are proven guilty.

Again it would also violate the rights in Section 70 of the Constitution of accused persons to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, especially those who are not yet convicted and even those who are also granted bail pending appeal.  Where a court has ruled, let us respect our courts and let us not use the Legislature to help the prosecution to oust the jurisdiction of the courts.  I thank you.

HON. ZIYAMBI:  Thank you Mr. Chairman.  I rise to contribute to the debate in that I am looking at the 72 hours that the Hon. Vice President is requesting in this Bill and the practicality of and applicability of it in real life situations where you have also a court that has made a decision maybe in Gokwe.  The record has to be transcribed and they have to note an appeal and the practicality of not soiling the name of the Prosecutor

General by failing to note an appeal within the required time, the possibility is very high.  I am not very sure about the rationale of reducing it from seven days to 72 hours without removing it completely if there is some intention of ensuring that the Prosecutor General does not have the powers to override a judicial decision.

My only other worry or clarification that I wanted is are we not going to breed laziness in the Prosecutor-General’s office in that they have the second bite of the cherry?  They are supposed to prepare their papers and argue against granting bail.  What they are saying here is the powers are okay in that maybe a criminal may be granted bail when he does not deserve to go out there and he will continue committing crimes.  Why not craft your arguments correctly and have the court granting the correct decision in the first place rather than having a scenario where the separation of power principle is now diminished by the Prosecutor General having judicial powers to override a court decision?

The other request that I wanted from the Hon. Vice President is on

Subsection A, it is written the Prosecutor-General or the Public Prosecutor,

I think now we have the office of the Prosecutor-General and everyone is prosecuting under the name of the Prosecutor-General.  Is there a need to say or the Public Prosecutor?  I thank you.

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA):  The Prosecutor-General is an officer of the court.  He is not being a judge.  Whatever court at whatever level can make a decision and that decision can be appealed against; if somebody is aggrieved by that decision it can be appealed against.  When the Prosecutor General is appealing against a decision of a court, he is not making himself a judge at all.  Again, I do not know where the honourable learned friend got lost.

In the past the law was seven days, allowing the Prosecutor General to appeal within seven days.  We have reduced this down to three days; he must do so within days – which mean that we have improved the period within which the Prosecutor-General is compelled to make his appeal against the granting of bail.  So, it is an improvement, it is administrative.  Hon. Ziyambi was correct.  If the case is being heard in Gokwe or

Chipinge and there is going to be an appeal.  You cannot say the same day the Prosecutor General who is in Harare should be able to appeal.  The docket or record must come from Chipinge and come here and then make the preparation to lodge the appeal.  This is why we have given three days.  The seven days was viewed as too long and I agreed when she made that argument.  We have reduced this to 72 hours which is three days.  Again we must always know that the law is not intended to please anybody.  The law is intended to be just and this is what is just.  I thank you.

House resumed.

Bill reported with amendments.

Bill referred to the Parliamentary Legal Committee.

COMMITTEE STAGE

BANKING AMENDMENT BILL, 2015 [H.B.6, 2015]

Third Order read: Committee: Resumption on the Banking Amendment Bill, 2015 [H.B. 6, 2015].

House in Committee.

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): I move that the Chairperson reports progress and seek

leave to sit again.

House resumed.

Progress reported.

Committee to resume: Wednesday, 25th November, 2015.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): I move that Order of the Day, Number 4 be stood over until Order of the Day, Number 8 has been disposed of.

Motion put and agreed to.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE,

LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON.

MNANGAGWA): Madam Speaker, I have been advised that Hon.

Muderedzwa was in the House but I understand he has gone outside.  I therefore move that Order of the Day, Number 8 be stood over until Order of the Day, Number 7 has been disposed of.

Motion put and agreed on.

MOTION

ROLE OF THE ZIMBABWE DEFENCE FORCES IN SOCIO-

POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF ZIMBABWE

HON. SHAMU: Thank you Madam Speaker.  I seek leave of the House to withdraw the notice of motion standing in my name.

HON. NDUNA: I second.

Motion; With leave, withdrawn.

On the motion of THE VICE PRESIDENT AND MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, the House

adjourned at a Quarter past Four o’clock pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply

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

Post comment