The speaker of parliament, Jacob Mudenda and Senate president, Mabel Chinomona have given in to the demands by Tinomudaishe Chinyoka’s demands for them to conduct the interviews of the Zimbabwe Anti Corruption Commission commissioners in the manner prescribed by the constitution.
Chinyoka, who is also an applicant to the position was one of President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s legal team which represented him during last year’s Constitutional Court challenge after the July 30.
In their response through their lawyers, the speaker of parliament and senate president indicated that they would follow the due process as stipulated.
“We write to advise that our clients have agreed that interviews be conducted in accordance with the Constitution as set out in your draft Order,” the letter reads.
A new notice will, however, be published to inform members of the public and participants on how they will proceed as the starting time may be changed to accommodate the participants.
They are also hoping that Chinyoka withdraws his application with no cost order.
The application was challenging the selection process which is scheduled for June 21.
At least 38 candidates will be interviewed this month, in the National Assembly and Senate Chambers from 9am to 4.20pm and the candidates were split into two groups which will be interviewed simultaneously.
Chinyoka argued that the manner in which the interviews will be conducted is not constitutional.
“I have filed this application in order to challenge the manner in which it is proposed that those interviews are to be held. It is my belief that the proposed format for the interviews is unconstitutional,” he said.
“The format that the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders of the Parliament of Zimbabwe (CSRO) proposes to use for the interviews means that in being assessed for their suitability as Commissioners, each candidate will only be seen by half of the CSRO.”
“This proposed manner of proceeding is against the Constitution, namely that it is the entire CSRO that should send names of possible Commissioners to the President, not a sub-committee thereof.”
Chinyoka also argued that no criteria had been disclosed as to how particular individuals ended up on either list to be interviewed.