Judgment No. CCZ 10/2018 Const. Application No. CCZ 80/2016 As for the Bill itself, there was no new Bill that was introduced but simply an amendment of the initial Bill with the approval of the National Assembly. Additionally, the Bill was duly examined, revised and approved by the PLC. Although the applicants were not part of the final meeting of the PLC, all of its members were given due notice of the meeting and three-fifths of the PLC constituted its quorum. What was agreed by the PLC was in accordance with what was agreed at its earlier meetings. As regards the requirement of public hearings, Parliament conducted two public hearings in Harare and requested the police to maintain peace and security together with the security personnel of the hearing Committee itself. Consequently, the Harare public was given full opportunity to air its view on the Bill. The third respondent (the Minister) is also opposed to the application. He avers that both Parliament and the President fulfilled their constitutional obligations in the enactment of the Act. Moreover, the Act provides for the independent tribunals envisioned by the Constitution. As regards the public hearing procedures, the requisite processes were duly followed in the enactment of the Act. The Minister did not intimidate or block the residents of Harare from attending the public hearings that were duly convened. The Bill was not enacted to remove the Mayor of Harare from office and he still remains in office. The residents of Harare were given full opportunity to air their views. The requisite processes were duly adhered to and were therefore entirely legitimate. DISTRIBUTED BY VERITAS e-mail: veritas@mango.zw; website: www.veritaszim.net Veritas makes every effort to ensure the provision of reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied. 5