Warship Dumba and Celine Eunice Nyakutsikwa v The Chairperson of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission and The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission

The applicants resided in Mt Pleasant Heights Suburb and were registered to vote under Mt Pleasant Constituency (Ward 17) in the 2008 and 2013 elections. For the pending 2018 elections, they found themselves registered to vote under Mazoe South Constituency (Ward 20). The applicants alleged malpractices by the respondents (Zimbabwe Electoral Commission) and sought to be re-registered under Mt Pleasant Constituency, arguing that they paid rates to the City of Harare and should vote in that municipality's constituency. The applicants raised petitions and correspondence from March 2017 onwards. The ZEC responded that Mt Pleasant Heights was built on Bunnockburn Farm, which had always been in Ward 20, Mazowe RDC, according to the 2008 Delimitation Report, and no subsequent delimitation exercise had been conducted. The applicants' voter registration slips showed they were registered under both constituencies at different times.

• Whether Mt Pleasant Heights Suburb should fall under Mt Pleasant Constituency (Ward 17) or Mazowe South Constituency (Ward 20) for the 2018 general elections
• Whether the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission violated Section 161(5)(a) and (b) of the Constitution by registering voters from Mt Pleasant Heights under Mazowe South Constituency
• Whether the applicable electoral boundaries for the 2018 elections were those established by the 2008 Delimitation Report
• The interpretation and application of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution regarding electoral boundaries for 'first elections'

The application was dismissed with costs.

The binding legal principle is that for 'first elections' under the 2013 Constitution of Zimbabwe, the electoral boundaries applicable are those that existed immediately before the publication day of the Constitution, as prescribed by Section 5 of the Sixth Schedule. Section 161 of the Constitution, which requires delimitation of electoral boundaries once every ten years after a population census, does not apply until such a census is conducted and a new delimitation exercise is carried out. Until then, the boundaries established by the 2008 Delimitation Report remain valid and binding. Payment of rates to a particular local authority does not determine which constituency a voter should be registered under; rather, the geographical boundaries established through the formal delimitation process govern voter registration.

The court made an observation that it could not perpetuate an error that may have occurred in the voting process in 2008 and 2013, suggesting there may have been irregularities in those elections but indicating the court's reluctance to remedy historical errors absent proper legal grounds. The court also commented that the respondents' contention that the same voter could not be registered under two constituencies with the same serial number on the same day might be mistaken, given the applicants' voter slips (Annexures G, H, J, and K) which appeared to tell a different story, though this did not affect the ultimate determination of the case.

This case establishes important principles regarding electoral boundaries in Zimbabwe during the transitional period under the 2013 Constitution. It clarifies that until a new delimitation exercise is conducted following a population census as required by Section 161 of the Constitution, the boundaries established under the previous delimitation report (2008) remain valid and applicable. The judgment demonstrates the application of transitional constitutional provisions, specifically the Sixth Schedule, in determining electoral matters. It reinforces that the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission acted lawfully in maintaining the 2008 boundaries for the 2018 elections. The case also illustrates that payment of rates to a particular local authority does not automatically determine constituency boundaries for electoral purposes.