Govt must not interfere with judiciary: Makarau
http://www.theindependent.co.zw
Thursday, 04 November 2010 19:14
SUPREME Court judge, Justice Rita Makarau, has said government should make
the judiciary more independent by involving parliament in the selection of
judges.
Justice Makarau, who was elevated in May to the Supreme Court bench from the
post of Judge President, told the Zimbabwe Independent this week that
government should create a panel of judges with varied law backgrounds for
the Supreme Court which also operates as the Court of Appeal.
Currently, the president appoints judges after consultation with the
Judiciary Services Commission and according to Amendment No 19 is supposed
to consult Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, which he did not do when he
appointed five judges in May.
The unilateral appointments of judges, together with the recent
re-appointment of provincial governors, appointment of ambassadors, the
Attorney-General Johannes Tomana and Governor of the Reserve Bank Gideon
Gono, has angered Tsvangirai, who has since declared them unconstitutional,
null and void.
“We probably need to have a panel of judges with varied backgrounds in
experience such as businesspersons, media practitioners and so forth,”
Makarau said. “This would make it easier to handle special issues. There are
so many variations which could be used to appoint judges, among them, the
confirmation of appointees by parliament. So long as this is not abused for
political reasons it is the right way to go.”
Makarau accused government of interfering with the judiciary by enacting
laws in parliament that counter court rulings which are not favourable to
the state.
“It is disheartening if you make a decision in court and parliament changes
the law. The judiciary should be accountable to the citizens. We have
unfortunate incidents where parliament changed the law when we had given an
unfavourable decision against the government. This makes the whole exercise
academic as the complainants do not get the relief sought,” Makarau said.
The judge gave examples, which included the constitutionality of prolonged
stay of prison inmates on death row and the legality of the land reform
programme embarked on in 2000.
“Parliament was used to change the law after the courts had ruled that the
prolonged stay of inmates on death row was a violation of human rights. This
was also replicated in cases surrounding the land reform programme on cases
brought forward by members of the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU) who
challenged the process,” she said.
“This development is against the principle of separation of powers between
the three arms of the state. The judiciary should be accountable to the
citizens when it makes decisions.”
In a landmark decision on December 21 2000, the full Supreme Court bench
headed by the then Chief Justice Anthony Gubbay ordered that farm invaders
be removed from the farms they had occupied and that government should
produce a workable land reform programmme in addition to the restoration of
the rule of law on all commercial farms. This essentially required the
removal of all unlawful invaders from commercial farms and the prevention of
further invasions.
However, Statutory Instrument 338 of 2001 amended the Land Acquisition Act
to give government full rights on the land when an acquisition order was
issued, including the rights to survey, demarcate and allocate land for
resettlement.
A provision was included in the Act to make it an offence for an owner or
occupier of the land to interfere with the process arising from effective
occupation.
Paidamoyo Muzulu