OPPOSITION CCC legislator Tendai Biti's urgent application to stop assault trial proceedings to allow for the determination of his main application for referral to the Constitutional Court has been dismissed by High Court judge Justice Rodgers Manyangadze.
Justice Manyangadze in his ruling stated that the application for review could be determined before the trial resumes.
Biti filed the application after the lower court continued with his trial after the dismissal of his earlier application for referral to the Constitutional Court.
He is facing charges of verbally assaulting local businesswoman Tatiana Alleshina at the Harare Magistrates Court in November 2020.
"The perusal of the applicant's papers shows that the gravamen of the application is that proceedings in the lower court be stayed pending the hearing and determination of the review application.
"It has now been agreed that the review be disposed of on an urgent basis, with timelines that place it before the resumption of trial. Clearly, it is anticipated that the substantive matter will be resolved before trial continues," Justice Manyangadze ruled.
Keep Reading
The judge said this development, in his view, renders the ancillary application superfluous and redundant.
"It defeats the argument, strenuously advanced on behalf of the applicant, that the review application will be rendered moot or academic," the judge said.
He went on saying this implies that a fundamental requirement for the grant of an urgent interdict has not been met.
He added that the requirement, as highlighted in the applicant's papers, is that irreparable harm will occur if the interdict is not granted.
"The harm being that the relief may be granted after the trial, thus rendering it a brutum fulmen. For reasons already indicated, that contention cannot be upheld," he said.
The judge further said the very basis on which the application was predicated had fallen away.
"Other considerations, such as the prospects of success, become unnecessary. If anything, they place the judge in a somewhat invidious position, it having been agreed that the same judge shall urgently hear and determine the review application," he said.
He further stated that it was, therefore, in the interests of justice that the merits or otherwise of the review matter be determined after they are fully ventilated at the hearing.