Lameck Nkiwane Muyambi v Jaison Kokeri Machaya

The petitioner was the MDC candidate in the June 2000 general elections for Gokwe South constituency, while the respondent was the ZANU-PF candidate. The respondent won with 12,644 votes against the petitioner's 3,615 votes. The petitioner alleged widespread electoral violence, including that he was severely assaulted on 19 June 2000 by a group of 50 or more ZANU-PF supporters using iron bars, sticks, knobkerries and sjamboks when he went to submit his list of polling agents. He was hospitalized until after the election. During his hospitalization, rumors circulated that he had died from his injuries, which allegedly prevented some voters from voting for him. The petitioner filed an election petition seeking to set aside the respondent's return to Parliament and for fresh elections to be held, alleging corrupt practices by the respondent and his party members.

• Whether the assault on the petitioner and related violence constituted corrupt practices within the meaning of section 105 of the Electoral Act
• Whether such corrupt practices were committed by or with the knowledge, consent or approval of the respondent or his agents as required by section 124(a) of the Electoral Act
• Whether the respondent could rely on the escape clause in section 125 of the Electoral Act to avoid having his election voided
• Whether political party supporters should be deemed agents of a candidate for purposes of electoral law

The election petition was dismissed with costs.

In electoral law matters, courts are to be guided strictly by the Electoral Act as there is no common law on the matter. Supporters of a political party are deemed to be agents of that party's candidate when their acts are meant to further the candidate's campaign and the candidate benefits from their actions, even without the candidate's direct knowledge or instruction. The use of force or threats against any person to influence voting constitutes a corrupt practice under section 105 of the Electoral Act. However, section 125 provides an escape clause whereby an election will not be voided if the candidate proves that: (a) no corrupt practice was committed by the candidate or election agent; (b) the offences were committed without the candidate's sanction or connivance; and (c) certain other statutory requirements are met. The Electoral Act establishes very high electoral morality for all Zimbabweans.

The court noted that the Electoral Act creates "very high electoral morality for all Zimbabweans" and emphasized the importance of protecting free franchise as a concept the Electoral Act was designed to protect. The court also commented on the credibility of various witnesses, finding most of the petitioner's witnesses not credible due to inconsistencies, poor demeanor, or contradictory evidence. The court observed that while the respondent may have been unaware of the assault on the petitioner, supporters of his party perpetrated it and he benefited from their actions, thus creating the agency relationship under electoral law principles.

This case establishes important principles in Zimbabwean electoral law regarding: (1) the attribution of acts by political party supporters to candidates as deemed agents, even without direct instruction or knowledge; (2) the high standard of electoral morality required under the Electoral Act; (3) the scope and application of the escape clause in section 125 which allows a candidate to avoid having their election voided despite corrupt practices by their deemed agents; and (4) the strict interpretation of electoral law as statutory matters with no common law supplement. The case demonstrates the tension between holding candidates accountable for political violence by their supporters while protecting candidates who personally acted properly.