| dc.description.abstract | Concern has been raised greatly by the arbitrary recall of lawmakers over the past few years. This is true because Section 67 of the Constitution's protection of the right ideally means that members of Parliament ought to account to the people as opposed to political parties. The legislative authority of Zimbabwe is derived from the people, and it is vested in and exercised in accordance with this Constitution by the Legislature, as stated in Section 117 of the Constitution. In the context of Zimbabwe, recall of legislators takes place in accordance with Section 129 (1) (k) of the Constitution, which states that a seat in the legislature becomes vacant if "the member has ceased to belong to the political party which he or or she was was a member of when he or she was elected to Parliament and the political party concerned, by written notice to the Speaker or the President of the Senate, as the case may be, has declared that the member has ceased to belong to the political party concerned. Because of the implications of this clause, over thirty opposition members of parliament have recently been recalled. The recalls were obviously outrageous, unprecedented, and politically motivated. This thus raised the question of who, between the electorate and the political party concerned, has the responsibility of recalling the elected representatives. As a result, it is possible to infer that Section 129 (1) (k) conflicts with other Constitutional provisions. Furthermore, as demonstrated by the Mutasa, Khupe, and Madzimure cases, all of which were decided and dismissed by the Constitutional Court, the interpretation that has been given to it is one that is there to support the political interests of political parties, as opposed to the rights of the affected individuals. However, it is obvious that a citizen-driven recall mechanism is the most ideal. Additionally, it would seem that the conditions of a recall mechanism must not be overly onerous in order to allow for citizen participation in order for it to adhere to the fundamental principles of democracy. In addition, it is evident from the case studies of the United Kingdom and Indonesia that the Speaker must be assured that the conditions for recall have been met before a recall can be carried out . The Zimbabwean approach, which relies on the Speaker of Parliament to exercise arbitrary recall powers before being satisfied that the requirements for recall have been met, is in conflict with this. As such, to guard against these vices, there may be need to amend the Constitution so much so that recall of parliamentarians in initiated by citizens, that way the mechanism will not be subject to abuse by the political elites at the expense of the electorate. | en_ZW |
