Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum Special Report Enforcing the Rule of Law in Zimbabwe adverse report, although this was disputed by one of the PLC’s members, Welshman Ncube (MDC, Bulawayo North-East).1 The Broadcasting Services Act (3/2001, Cap 2:06) was similarly fast-tracked through Parliament against the recommendation of the Parliamentary Legal Committee (PLC) and tough opposition. So it is clear that Parliamentarians belonging to Zanu-PF have, for over 15 years, overlooked the interests of their electors. In passing unconstitutional statutes, they have deliberated and breached the rule of law and, on some occasions, Parliamentary rules of procedure. When its Parliament does not uphold the Constitution and the rule of law, Zimbabwe’s citizens have a very big problem. The Zimbabwe Council of Churches recently expressed ‘concern’ about another undemocratic practice – ‘the fast-tracking of crucial Bills’ through the House, ‘since this is only another manifestation of lack of respect for the legal system. There should be broad-based consultation before a Bill is passed.’2 The Speaker Our Constitution (s39) requires MPs to elect a Speaker and Deputy Speaker to preside over Parliament. The Speaker does not have to be an MP, merely to meet the qualifications for election. At present, both the Speaker Emmerson Mnangagwa (himself a lawyer) and his female deputy, Edna Madzongwe, are Presidential appointees to Parliament. Neither were elected to Parliament and neither attracted any opposition support in their election to their presiding positions. The Constitution is silent on the way in which the Speaker is to perform her or his role. The partiality in practice of this role was little evident while Zanu-PF had a large majority in the House. However, the Speaker and the Minister of Home Affairs curtailed normal Parliamentary debate on the Citizenship of Zimbabwe Amendment Bill, despite vocal protest from MPs belonging to opposition parties. The debate on the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Bill was also tightly managed, with vocal oppositionists from within the ruling party being ejected from the House. More recently, in a House that now has a vigorous opposition, the importance of the Speaker’s role in manouevring for his/her party has become more apparent. For example, on the urging of the leader of the House, the Speaker ruled that the Parliamentary Legal Committee had violated standing orders in delivering after its deadline its report on a Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act Statutory Instrument (SI 255A/2000, dealing with broadcasting services). He used this breach to assume, under Schedule 4 s2(1) of the Constitution, that the PLC had approved the SI. He then discharged the PLC report from the Order Paper, thus preventing Parliamentary discussion of its contents. Rather than condoning a minor oversight, he chose to presume PLC consent to this SI against clear and vocal evidence to the contrary.3 Parliamentary Debates 27,25:2475; 27,26:2597-8; 27,27:2831. The process of passing this Bill was very reminiscent of the University of Zimbabwe Amendment Bill in 1990, and the Citizenship Act in 1984. 2 The Daily News 25.8.01. 3 Parliamentary Debates 27,55:5612-9. 1 9