Harare, Zimbabwe – High Court Judge Justice Tawanda Chitapi has deferred his ruling until Thursday next week in a case where Walter Magaya is contesting his disqualification from running for the presidency of the Zimbabwe Football Association (ZIFA).
Magaya, who argues that his removal from the list of candidates was unlawful, has taken legal action against ZIFA, alleging procedural irregularities in the decision.
During Friday’s proceedings, Magaya’s legal representative, Advocate Thabani Mpofu, questioned the ZIFA ethics committee’s rationale, alleging their decision lacked merit and verged on corruption. Mpofu asserted:
“The requirement set out in the ZIFA Constitution is straightforward: it stipulates an ‘O’ Level or equivalent qualification. A diploma issued by a university, which is clearly superior to an ‘O’ Level, should meet this criterion. On that basis, this application should succeed.”
Magaya submitted a diploma from the University of South Africa (UNISA), claiming it to be a qualification surpassing the required standard. However, the diploma has come under scrutiny, with some flagging it as fake and dubbing it a “miracle diploma.”
Mpofu further argued that ZIFA failed to provide a valid explanation for the disqualification, stating:
“The respondents are aware they must justify the disqualification. However, they have not offered reasons to suggest the documents provided do not meet the qualification threshold. The Constitution establishes a minimum requirement, not an unattainable standard.”
Mpofu also emphasized that Magaya’s inability to present his ‘O’ Level certificate does not indicate he lacks the qualification. According to the ZIFA Constitution, candidates should be afforded seven days to submit missing documents. He accused ZIFA of prematurely disqualifying his client without due process and questioned whether any individual within ZIFA held the authority to enforce such a decision.
He also revealed that Magaya had spoken to Lincoln Mutasa, chairperson of the ZIFA normalisation committee, who reportedly indicated that qualifications were not the reason for Magaya’s disqualification. Mpofu suggested that Mutasa’s claims could be subject to challenge.
Representing ZIFA, Lovemore Madhuku countered that Magaya’s application was improperly brought before the court, asserting:
“The decisions of the respondent are not reviewable by this court. The basis for ZIFA being brought to court is unclear.”
Justice Chitapi pressed ZIFA on the lack of documentation supporting Magaya’s disqualification, stating that a record of proceedings was necessary to validate the decision. Chitapi noted:
“If that record exists, it should be submitted to the court to establish who made the decision. Without such a record, there is no substantive issue to address. The law stipulates that this record must be provided, and submissions should align with the actions taken.”
The court awaits further submissions and has reserved judgment to allow for a thorough review of the case.
For comments, Feedback and Opinions do get in touch with our editor on WhatsApp: +44 7949 297606.
