Judgment No. CCZ 9/2016 2
Const. Application No. CCZ 316/2012
In each case five questions were referred to the Supreme Court for determination
by a magistrate in terms of s 24(2) of the former Constitution upon request by the applicant. The
learned magistrate was of the opinion that the request for referral of the constitutional questions
which had arisen in the proceedings before him was not frivolous or vexatious. The referral took
place in proceedings in which the applicant faced a criminal charge of possessing a television set
without a viewer’s licence in contravention of s 38(B)(1) as read with s 38E(1)(h)(i) of the Act.
The questions presented in argument for determination at the hearing in each case
were whether ss 38B(1), 38C, 38D(2) and 38E(1)(C)and 38E(i)(h)(i) of the Act each infringe the
applicant’s constitutional right to protection from compulsory deprivation of property (Section
16(1) the right to the protection of the law (Section 18(1)) and the right to freedom of expression
(Section 20(1)).
The applicant in each case seeks a declaration that each provision of the Act
infringes each of the fundamental human rights enshrined in the relevant provision of the
Constitution and is invalid.
At the hearing, Mr Mpofu for the applicants, indicated that the determination of
the question whether each of the provisions of the Act referred to infringes the fundamental right
of the applicants enshrined in ss 19(1) (freedom of conscience), 21(1)) (freedom of association)
and 23(1) (protection from discrimination) is no longer sought from the Court.
contentions may therefore be put out of view.
Those