admin
Eddie Chikamhi-Senior Sports Reporter
DYNAMOS chairman Isaiah Mupfurutsa has rubbished his “purported suspension” by the suspended ZIFA board after his lawyers advised that the move by the desperate football leadership was a nullity.
Mupfurutsa, through his legal advisors Gill, Godlonton & Gerrans, yesterday responded to the suspended ZIFA chief executive Joseph Mamutse challenging the legality of the suspension.
They also tore into the charge sheet that was used as basis for the decision and argued that the ZIFA board and their chief executive were all suspended under the SRC Act and were therefore incapacitated to make such decisions.
“We refer to the above matter and advise that we represent Mr Mupfurutsa, the executive chairman of Dynamos Football Club. Please take note of our interest in this matter.
“Your correspondence dated 28 January 2022 which was received by our client on 31 January 2022 has been brought to us for advice,” wrote Herbert Mutasa of Gill, Godlonton & Gerrans to Mamutse.
“Our aforesaid client’s position is articulated hereunder: –
“1. Your locus standi to act as the general secretary of the Zimbabwe Football Association: We are aware that the Sports and Recreation Commission suspended you from the position of general secretary of the Zimbabwe Football Association sometime in January 2021.
“Without having been reinstated to the aforesaid position, you are in no position to undertake any valid administrative, let alone juristic acts on behalf of the Zimbabwe Football Association.”
Mutasa also charged the suspended board and their chief executive were misleading the stakeholders that they had the right to resume duties after lodging an appeal against their suspension at the Administrative Court.
“Our attention has been drawn to the fact that you have lodged an appeal to the Administrative Court of Zimbabwe challenging your aforesaid suspension. Further, we understand that following your aforesaid appeal, you have taken the position that the decision of the Sports and Recreation Commission to suspend you is suspended until that appeal is finalised.
“With great respect, we wish to point out that the position that you have taken as aforesaid is not supported by the Law of Zimbabwe.
“For your benefit, the position of the law is as stated by the Supreme Court of Zimbabwe that: — ‘The position may now be accepted as settled in this jurisdiction that, unless empowered by law to do so, an inferior court, tribunal or other authority has no power to order the suspension of its own orders or judgments and, further, that the noting of an appeal against the judgment or order of such a court, tribunal or other authority in the absence of a statutory provision to that effect, does not have the effect of suspending the operation of the judgment or order that is sought to be appealed against.’ See Longman Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd v Midzi & Ors 2008 (1) ZLR 198 S. at page 206.
“It is needless for us to emphasise that the Sports and Recreation Commission Act in terms of which you were suspended does not provide for the suspension of the decision of the Sports and Recreation Commission pending any appeal to the Administrative Court.
“For the above stated reasons, our client has taken the position that your letters of 28 January 2022 cannot be attributed to ZIFA because at the time that you authored them and indeed to date, you do not have the requisite mandate to undertake any administrative roles on behalf of ZIFA.”
Mutasa also said it was not clear which organ of ZIFA effected the suspension. Apparently three members of the suspended board — Felton Kamambo, Phillemon Machana and Bryton Malandule — have been making the decisions even in the absence of a required 50 percent quorum, in the event the board was functional.
“Although your aforesaid letters and the purported suspension purport to be emanating from ZIFA, they do not disclose the relevant organ of ZIFA between Congress and Executive Committee from which the decision to purportedly suspend our client emanated.
“The point that we wish to draw to your attention is that in terms of the ZIFA constitution, neither Congress nor the Executive Committee has the power to suspend “a person” in the position of our client as purportedly done. For this reason, the purported suspension is a nullity and of no force and effect. We have advised our client to ignore it and proceed with the execution of his duties as before,” said Mutasa.
He added that the charge preferred against their client was not provided for in the ZIFA constitution. Mupfurutsa was suspended along with Johnfat Sibanda of Highlanders and CAPS United’s Nhamo Tutisani and they face several allegations emanating from their involvement in the proposed special extraordinary general meeting that is set to revoke the mandate of some members of the current board.
“The ZIFA constitution does not confer any powers on the secretariat to undertake any disciplinary processes against any person, let alone a person in the position of our client.
“The secretariat cannot arrogate to itself those powers. For that reason, apart from it coming from an outsider as explained above, the purported charge is a nullity because it is not provided for in terms of the ZIFA constitution.
“In any event, our client is aware of the fact that as at 28 January 2022, the date of the purported charge, the Executive Committee of ZIFA had been suspended by the Sports and Recreation Commission.
“That suspension is still extant regardless of any appeals that may have been lodged to the Administrative Court by the affected members. (Please refer to the legal position articulated above).
“Our client is aware of the fact that congress did not make any resolution to institute disciplinary measures against him. On that additional basis, the purported charge is invalid.
“In view of the foregoing, we draw your attention to the fact that we have advised our client to ignore your correspondence and carry on with his duties as a football administrator as previously advised.”
Online Reporter