more Quotes
Connect with us


SA: Court had no right to interfere with government’s work, says Motsoaledi as he challenges ZEP decision

Spread This News


  • Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi is challenging a 28 June decision that found his termination of the Zimbabwe Exemption Permits unconstitutional and unlawful.
  • The permits allow around 178 000 Zimbabweans to live and work in South Africa.
  • But the Helen Suzman Foundation argues that Motsoaledi faces “no prospect” of success on appeal, and says his application should be dismissed.

Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi says the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria had no right to “interfere” with the government’s decision to terminate 14-year-old Zimbabwe Exemption Permits (ZEPs).

However, through his advocate, William Mokhare, he added that he was open to extending the 31 December deadline for the special permits, which granted legal status to around 178 000 Zimbabweans living in South Africa.

Motsoaledi is applying for leave to appeal the High Court’s 28 June ruling that found the minister’s decision to end the ZEPs “unlawful, unconstitutional, and invalid”.

The court extended the permits for 12 months from 28 June, pending the conclusion of a “fair process” that includes an adequate public participation process the court found had not been done before the 7 June gazette for the ZEP termination.

The June judgment followed the Helen Suzman Foundation’s application to set aside Motsoaledi’s announcement to discontinue the special permits, which began in 2009.

During a virtual hearing on Monday, Mokhare told the High Court that Motsoaledi agreed that the ZEP issue was “not only a matter of great importance and considerable public significance, but…a matter that raises huge constitutional implications”.

Mokhare said its importance entailed the government’s prerogative to deal “with the acceptance of foreigners within its own borders” – factors, Mokhare contended, that included “asylum, immigration, refugee, economic, political, and socioeconomic considerations”.

He recalled that the reasons for the special dispensation was political and economic “instability” in Zimbabwe, which caused “strain” on South Africa due to “the influx” of citizens in the country’s northern neighbour.

“The only way the minister’s decision could be attacked is whether the minister’s decision is rational. Rationality is a low-threshold type of review because it is more linked to the principle of deference, where the courts are loathed to interfere with executive decision-making, particularly where it is more linked to policy,” Mokhare said, adding that policy was not a “specialised terrain” of the courts.

Mokhare argued:

If the court finds that the initial decision, which was to give reprieve on a temporary basis for Zimbabweans because of the situation in their country, then the court cannot interfere with the decision to terminate if the executive [the government] concludes that those conditions are no longer prevalent. And therefore, this dispensation must come to an end.

But Mokhare said Motsoaledi was not opposed to extending the deadline.

“Nothing prevents the minister from always looking at the conditions prevalent at the time and [taking] a decision that does not adversely affect the ZEP members.”

However, the Helen Suzman Foundation – through its advocate, Carol Steinberg – asserted that Motsoaledi’s application should be dismissed. Steinberg said the minister should be given a “punitive costs order” because his appeal had “no prospects of success” at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

“A mere possibility of success, an arguable case, or one that is not hopeless is not enough. In short, our argument is that there are actually zero prospects of success in this case,” Steinberg asserted.

She added that the 178 000 people affected by Motsoaledi’s decision to terminate the permits had an “iron-clad right” to be heard before regulations were put in place.

“In law, there is a watertight obligation to hear what affected people have to say before a decision impacting on their lives is made. It is the first principle of natural justice. It is [not in doubt] that the minister did not, in fact, hear from the affected people before making the [termination] decision. He called for representations later,” Steinberg said.

She added:

There is no court in South Africa that will ever say that the minister is entitled to make a decision – which profoundly impacts on the lives of many, many people – without hearing from them first.

Her views were supported by advocate David Simonsz, who represented the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa. Simonsz said no one – including the High Court – wanted to interfere with the government’s work.

He added that the Department of Home Affairs had to use the court-ordered 12-month extension to do a proper public participation process.

“What the minister should do is take the opportunity afforded to him by this court to follow a lawful process and make whatever decision he chooses to make – once he takes into account the just and proper submissions and representations of those affected. That is the proper way forward,” Simonsz argued.

But Mokhare dismissed the argument that there was no public consultation, saying the law allowed participation whether before or after a decision is taken and that the government had solicited views and opened visa applications for existing ZEP holders, who would not be affected by the December deadline should it arrive without their applications being finalised.

“The point here is that we say there was [consultation] – there was [consultation] adapted to the circumstances of the case. We submit that there are prospects of success on the merits.”

The High Court reserved judgment.

Continue Reading


African 2026 World Cup Qualifying Fixtures

Spread This News

Although the 2026 FIFA World Cup is still years away, the African qualifiers are set to begin soon. The next World Cup will be held in three locations for the first time in history – the US, Canada, and Mexico. CAF has secured 9 slots for African teams who will battle it out for a chance to play on the global stage. Below, we review the African 2026 FIFA World Cup qualification schedule and fixtures.

New Qualification Format

Nine CAF teams will make it to the World Cup. This is a change from the previous five, which means local and international betting sites have to update their betting lines even as the CAF adjusts its qualification format. The CAF announced this new format on May 19 this year. Now, participating teams will be drawn into nine groups of six teams, with each group winner qualifying directly for the World Cup. 

Draw and Groups

On July 13, the CAF performed the draw for the qualifications in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. All 54 CAF football associations will be represented, and the teams will be divided into the following groups:

  1. Group I: Chad, Comoros, CAR, Madagascar, Ghana, Mali
  2. Group H: Sao Tome and Principe, Liberia, Malawi, Namibia, Equatorial Guinea, Tunisia
  3. Group G: Somalia, Botswana, Mozambique, Uganda, Guinea, Algeria
  4. Group F: Seychelles, Burundi, Gambia, Kenya, Gabon, Ivory Coast
  5. Group E: Eritrea, Niger, Tanzania, Congo, Zambia, Morocco
  6. Group D: Mauritius, Eswatini, Libya, Angola, Cape Verde, Cameroon
  7. Group C: Lesotho, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Benin, South Africa, Nigeria
  8. Group B: South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Mauritania, DR Congo, Senegal
  9. Group A: Djibouti, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Burkina Faso, Egypt


The qualifiers will be held across 10 match days with some combined dates for the playoff semifinals and finals. The closest dates to look forward to are:

Matchday One: Nov. 13-21, 2023

  1. Group I: Comoros Vs. Central African Republic, Ghana Vs. Madagascar, Mali Vs. Chad
  2. Group H: Liberia Vs. Malawi, Equatorial Guinea Vs. Namibia, Tunisia Vs. Sao Tome e Principe
  3. Group G: Botswana Vs. Mozambique, Guinea Vs. Uganda, Algeria Vs. Somalia
  4. Group F: Burundi Vs. Gambia, Gabon Vs. Kenya, Ivory Coast Vs. Seychelles
  5. Group E: Niger Vs. Tanzania, Zambia Vs. Congo Brazzaville, Morocco Vs. Eritrea
  6. Group D: Eswatini Vs. Libya, Cape Verde Vs. Angola, Cameroon Vs. Mauritius
  7. Group C: Rwanda Vs. Zimbabwe, South Africa Vs. Benin, Nigeria Vs. Lesotho
  8. Group B: Sudan Vs. Togo, Senegal Vs. South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo Vs. Mauritania,
  9. Group A: Ethiopia Vs. Sierra Leone, Burkina Faso Vs. Guinea-Bissau, Egypt Vs. Djibouti

Matchday Two: Nov. 13-21, 2023

  1. Group I: Chad Vs. Madagascar, Comoros Vs. Ghana, CAR Vs. Mali
  2. Group H: Sao Tome Vs. Namibia, Liberia Vs. E. Guinea, Malawi Vs. Tunisia
  3. Group G: Somalia Vs. Uganda, Botswana Vs. Guinea, Mozambique Vs. Algeria
  4. Group F: Seychelles Vs. Kenya, Burundi Vs. Gabon, Gambia Vs. I. Coast
  5. Group E: Eritrea Vs. Congo, Niger Vs. Zambia, Tanzania Vs. Morocco
  6. Group D: Mauritius Vs. Angola, Eswatini Vs. Cape Verde, Libya Vs. Cameroon
  7. Group C: Lesotho Vs. Benin, Rwanda Vs. S. Africa, Zimbabwe Vs. Nigeria
  8. Group B: S. Sudan Vs. Mauritania, Sudan Vs. DR Congo, Togo Vs. Senegal
  9. Group A: Djibouti Vs. G. Bissau, Ethiopia Vs. B. Faso, S. Leone Vs. Egypt

Wrapping Up

The African (CAF) qualification campaign will kick off in November and set the stage for the 54 participating countries to compete for the 9 World Cup slots. Meanwhile, Morocco’s run in the 2022 World Cup has revitalized enough hope on the continent for a real shot at the trophy.

Continue Reading


We do not recognise Mnangagwa as President – says opposition as MPs boycott 10th Parliament opening, SONA address

Spread This News

By Staff Reporter

CITIZENS Coalition for Change legislators have snubbed the State of the Nation Address (SONA) delivered by President Emmerson Mnangagwa at the opening of the 10th Parliament.

According to a source, the decision to steer clear of the SONA along with the official opening of the 10th Parliament came from the party.

This is the latest protest by the opposition party following the conclusion of the general elections in August.

President Mnangagwa emerged winner with a 52,6% share of the vote while Chamisa got 44%.

CCC has since disputed the election results while calling for a rerun.

“We have been told to remain in our constituencies. The directive came as a party position,” revealed the source.

Opposition spokesperson Promise Mkwananzi said: “We are boycotting the processes that Mnangagwa wants us to undertake on the basis of the fact that we as CCC do not recognize an election that put him there. The election was a sham, it did not go well. If fell abysmally short of the expected standards of a free and fair election in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe as well as in terms of SADC and AU protocols on free and fair elections.

“Accordingly, we are not attending that process. We want to send a clear message that there should be a free election in Zimbabwe under the auspices of SADC. So, that is the message that will be sending out.”

After the contested 2018 general election, then MDC-Alliance MPs walked out as soon as Mnangagwa began his SONA in protest.

Continue Reading


Zanu PF dispels any hope for Transitional government, maintains August elections were free and fair

Spread This News

By Leopold Munhende | Chief Correspondent

ZANU PF Treasurer General Patrick Chinamasa has dispelled hopes for a transitional government or rerun, options being pushed regionally after Zimbabwe’s heavily criticised August polls.

Chinamasa took to Twitter Monday to declare that, despite regional and international criticism of the election, Zanu PF maintained it was free and fair.

He described calls for a rerun of the elections won by President Emmerson Mnangagwa, as neocolonial.

Mnangagwa claimed 52.6% of the presidential vote against main contender Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) President Nelson Chamisa’s 44%.

“I ask the CCC class and its Prefect, Nelson Chamisa, to repeat after me the following that the 23rd of August 2023 was free, fair, transparent, and credible; that there will be no rerun of the elections,” said Chinamasa.

“There will be no Government of National Unity (GNU), there will be no so-called Transitional Authority (whatever that may mean), Zimbabwe, under Zanu PF’s watch will never be a banana republic.

“Zanu PF will forever say “NO” to neocolonialism and hegemonism and an emphatic “NO” to subjugation by sanctions-imposing Western countries, Nyika Inovakwa Nevene Vayo, Ichitongwa Nevene Vayo, Ichinamatirwa Nevene Vayo, Ichichengetedzwa Nevene Vayo, Ichidzivirirwa Nevene Vayo. 

Zimbabwe will never, never, never be a colony again.”

Mnangagwa’s re-election has received massive criticism after heavy bungling by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) on August 23.

Late provision of voting material, allegations of voter intimidation by Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO) backed Forever Associates Zimbabwe (FAZ), barring of opposition rallies, arrest of opposing politicians and accusations ZEC had been captured by the military all worked against its credibility.

The European Union (EU), Commonwealth, United Kingdom (UK), regional body SADC and AU all questioned its fairness.

Zanu PF has spent the greater part of Zimbabwe’s post election period to lay into Zambian President Hakainde Hichilema whom it accuses of orchestrating negative reviews of Zimbabwe’s polls by SADC.

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2021 ZimFocus.

One Zimbabwe Classifieds | ZimMarket

Zimbabwe Market Classifieds | ZimMarket

1 Zimbabwe Market Classifieds | ZimMarket

Linking Buyers To Sellers Is Our Business Tradition

Fatal error: Uncaught wfWAFStorageFileException: Unable to verify temporary file contents for atomic writing. in /home/zimfocusco/public_html/wp-content/plugins/wordfence/vendor/wordfence/wf-waf/src/lib/storage/file.php:51 Stack trace: #0 /home/zimfocusco/public_html/wp-content/plugins/wordfence/vendor/wordfence/wf-waf/src/lib/storage/file.php(658): wfWAFStorageFile::atomicFilePutContents('/home/zimfocusc...', '<?php exit('Acc...') #1 [internal function]: wfWAFStorageFile->saveConfig('livewaf') #2 {main} thrown in /home/zimfocusco/public_html/wp-content/plugins/wordfence/vendor/wordfence/wf-waf/src/lib/storage/file.php on line 51