Key Points
-
Lawyer says tribunal powers on judge removal are tyrannical.
-
Judges lack the right to appeal tribunal recommendations.
-
Petition calls for constitutional amendments to protect judicial fairness.
A Harare lawyer has petitioned the Attorney-General of Zimbabwe to review how tribunals remove judges. The lawyer, Chawaona Wildroad Kanoti, said the system is tyrannical because judges cannot appeal.
Kanoti described the process as a “slaughter inquiry.” He argued that no judge has ever been cleared by such a tribunal. Most end up resigning, whether guilty or not.
“This is untenable,” Kanoti said, stressing that the current setup strips judges of their constitutional rights.
Judges denied appeals under current law
Kanoti said Section 187 of the Constitution forces the President to act on tribunal recommendations without giving judges a chance to appeal. He noted that this removes a key safeguard in any democracy where checks and second opinions are essential.
President Emmerson Mnangagwa has already dismissed judges through this system. Those affected include Francis Bere, Benjamin Chikowero, and Erica Ndewere. Kanoti added that subsection (8) of Section 187 blocks the President from correcting tribunal errors, which makes the process unjust.
“The wording itself, ‘Removal of judges from office,’ is already conclusive and prejudicial,” he submitted.
Call for reforms to protect judicial fairness
Kanoti urged Parliament to amend subsections (7) and (8) of Section 187. He said the law should allow appeals to higher courts such as the Supreme Court or the Constitutional Court.
He also criticized the use of retired judges to lead tribunals. According to him, they may feel loyal to the President who appointed them, reducing independence.
“The Constitution should ensure checks and balances,” Kanoti said. “A tribunal equal to the High Court should not have the final word on removing judges.”
The petition was also copied to the Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Minister and the Judicial Service Commission.
