I heard this application on 16 May 2022. I delivered an ex tempore judgment in which I granted the applicant’s prayer as contained in her draft order. On 23 May 2022 the respondent wrote requesting written reasons for my decision. My reasons are these:
The applicant who is an ex-constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police was charged under para 35 of the Schedule to the Police Act and was convicted. She appealed to the first respondent who is the Police Commissioner-General. He dismissed her appeal but did not furnish her with reasons for the dismissal of her appeal. He convened... More
This is an application for a declaration that the first and second respondents’
failure to furnish the applicant with reasons for their decision is unlawful and wrongful. The
applicant also seeks to setting aside of his discharge from the Zimbabwe Republic Police, and
for an order that he be reinstated to his employment as a police officer, together with costs of
suit on the higher scale. The application is opposed by the respondents More
The three applicants are ex-constables in the Zimbabwe Republic Police. On 2 May 2014 the three applicants were charged for contravening para 27 of the schedule to the Police Act [Chapter 11:10], “acting in an unbecoming manner or disorderly manner or any manner prejudicial to good order or discipline or reasonably likely to bring discredit to the Police Force”. More
The applicant applied for a declaratur. He moved the court to declare that:
i. his trial under the Police Act for the offence he was tried under ordinary law which amounted to dual prosecution be declared unlawful - and
ii. his discharge from the Police Service following his conviction under the Police Act for the offence he was acquitted of under ordinary law be declared unlawful. More
This is a court application in terms of which the applicant seeks a declaratur. The applicant an ex-constable in the Zimbabwe Republic Police sued The Commissioner General of Police, The Police Service Commission and the Minister of Home Affairs for the following order:
‘(1) That refusal by the 1st respondent to furnish applicant with reasons for his discharge be and is hereby declared unlawful and wrongful.
(2) The failure by the 1st respondent to afford applicant the right to be heard before being discharged from the Police Service be and is hereby declared to be wrongful and unlawful.
(3) The... More
