Judgment No. CCZ 12/2015 42 Const. Application No. 79/14 Enactment of Section 78(1) of the Constitution Consideration of the changes in international human rights law on marriage and family relations over five decades, shows that s 22(1) of the Marriage Act was born out of lack of commitment to the protection of the fundamental rights of the girl child. Section 78(1) as read with s 81(1) of the Constitution is born out of commitment by the international community including Zimbabwe to providing greater and effective protection of the fundamental rights of the child. Section 78(1) of the Constitution was enacted for the purpose of complying with the obligations Zimbabwe had undertaken under Article 21(2) of the ACRWC to specify by legislation eighteen years as the minimum age for marriage and abolish child marriage. Under Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which came into force on 2 January 1980, a State Party is enjoined to hold in good faith and observe the rights and obligations in a treaty to which it is a party. Zimbabwe had to see through its obligations under the conventions to which it is a party requiring it to specify eighteen years to be the minimum age of marriage and to abolish child marriage. As the obligations were specific in terms of what the States Parties had to do, the compliance by Zimbabwe was also specific. Although the respondents contend that the nature and scope of the content of s 78(1) of the Constitution is ascertainable from the literal meaning of the language used all they did was to restate the terms of the provision. Mere restatement of terms of a provision is not an application of the Golden Rule of construction. The respondents overlooked the fact that even the literal rule of interpretation is based on the acceptance of the principle that words are