Judgment No. CCZ 12/2015 4 Const. Application No. 79/14 At the time ss 78(1) and 81(1) of the Constitution came into force, s 22(1) of the Marriage Act [Chapter 5:11] provided that a girl who had attained the age of sixteen years was capable of contracting a valid marriage. She had to obtain the consent in writing to the solemnization of the marriage of persons who were, at the time of the proposed marriage, her legal guardians or, where she had only one legal guardian, the consent in writing of such legal guardian. A boy under the age of eighteen years and a girl under the age of sixteen years had no capacity to contract a valid marriage except with the written permission of the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs (“the Minister”). A child was defined under s 2 of the Child Abduction Act [Chapter 5:05] and s 2 of the Children’s Protection and Adoption Act [Chapter 5:06] to be a person under the age of sixteen years. The applicants contend that since “a child” is now defined by s 81(1) of the Constitution to mean a girl and a boy under the age of eighteen years no child has the capacity to enter into a valid marriage in Zimbabwe since the coming into force of ss 78(1) and 81(1) of the Constitution on 22 May 2013. They contend further that s 22(1) of the Marriage Act or any other law which authorises a girl under the age of eighteen years to marry, infringes the fundamental right of the girl child to equal treatment before the law enshrined in s 81(1)(a) of the Constitution. The argument was that s 22(1) of the Marriage Act exposes the girl child to the horrific consequences of early marriage which are the very injuries against which the fundamental rights are intended to protect every child. The respondents opposed the application and the granting of the relief sought by the applicants on two alternative grounds. They took as a point in limine the contention that the applicants lacked the right to approach the court claiming the relief sought. The argument made on behalf of the respondents was that although the applicants claimed to have approached