Zimbabweans on Twitter are divided as lawyers from the opposition such as Tendai Biti, Lovemore Madhuku, Welshman Ncube and Job Sikhala represent Zanu-PF clients such as Phelekezela Mphoko and Ignatius Chombo, Kudzanai Chipanga.
Madhuku is representing Chipanga and Chombo while he is the leader of the National Constituent Assembly (NCA). Chombo is facing a number of charges from fraud, criminal abuse of office and corruption. Welshman Ncube is representing Mphoko in a matter where the former Vice President is seeking an exit package from Government.
Sikhala is representing former Foreign Affairs Minister Walter Mzembi who is facing allegations of corruption and criminal abuse of office based on events which occurred when he was still the Minister of Tourism and Hospitality Industry. When he was admitted to the bar as a lawyer, Sikhala vowed to use his newly-acquired legal skills to fight the Zanu PF government’s poor human rights record. He is quoted by NewsDay as having said:
I have a commitment to fight for justice and human rights. I believe lack of legal services and access to the majority of Zimbabweans has been the major factor with thousands of our people suffering gross human rights abuses. I want to leave a mark in defending human rights
Writing on his Facebook Wall, Biti’s sidekick Jacob Mafume, a lawyer himself, went on the brutal offensive attack and labelled those opposing; “skyscraper imbeciles and moral barons”
Below are some of the comments on micro-blogging website, Twitter and tell us what you think:
I get my worst confusion when opposition leaders are found at the forefront of defending corrupt Zanu PF big thieves..Could somebody help me understand this:
Mzembi-Job Sikhala
Chombo-Lovemore Madhuku
Gono-Tendai Biti
Mphoko-Welshman Ncube@nelsonchamisa
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
When an opposition leader who also happens to be a lawyer decides to defend, in court, a Zanu PF politician accused of looting public funds, does he not become a beneficiary of stolen money? What are the moral ramifications? And what should the electorate make of this?
Well done to the opposition lawyers representing ZANU PF people. The upholding of rights and the constitution comes before any political party. While at it, please get insider information from the obviously bitter ZANU PF people. It could be helpful
Well done to the opposition lawyers representing ZANU PF people. The upholding of rights and the constitution comes before any political party. While at it, please get insider information from the obviously bitter ZANU PF people. It could be helpful
Well done to the opposition lawyers representing ZANU PF people. The upholding of rights and the constitution comes before any political party. While at it, please get insider information from the obviously bitter ZANU PF people. It could be helpful
Well done to the opposition lawyers representing ZANU PF people. The upholding of rights and the constitution comes before any political party. While at it, please get insider information from the obviously bitter ZANU PF people. It could be helpful
