Maravi

(NEWZIMBABWE) Full text: Locardia Karimatsenga affidavit

Full text: Locardia Karimatsenga affidavit
Wedding bells ... Tsvangirai plans to wed new love Elizabeth Macheka on September 15
07/09/2012 00:00:00
by

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE CASE NO…………………/12
HELD AT HARARE
In the matter between:
LOCARDIA KARIMATSENGA APPLICANT
AND
MORGAN RICHARD TSVANGIRAI 1st RESPONDENT
AND
ELIZABETH MACHEKA 2ND RESPONDENT
AND
BISHOP KADENGE 3RD RESPONDENT
AND

THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
TOBAIWA MUDEDE 4TH RESPONDENT

APPLICANT’S FOUNDING AFFIDAVIT

I, LOCARDIA KARIMATSENGA, do hereby make oath and state that:

1. I am the Applicant in this matter and the facts stated herein under are to the best of my knowledge and belief, true and correct. My address for service for purposes of this matter is c/o Messrs Venturas and Samukange, corner third street and Kwame Nkrumah Avenue, Harare.

2. The 1ST Respondent is Morgan Richard Tsvangirai, my husband the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe and the President of MDC- T, whose address for service is c/o the Prime Minister’s Office, Munhumutapa Building, Samora Machel Avenue, Harare.

3. The 2nd Respondent is Elizabeth Macheka, the second wife to the 1st Respondent and who the 1st Respondent is proposing to marry under the Marriages Act Chapter 5:11, whose address for service is 49 Kew Drive Highlands, Harare.

4. The 3rd Respondent is Bishop Kadenge, who is the Bishop of the Methodist Church, whose address for service is Central Avenue, Harare.

5. The 4th Respondent is the Registrar General and custodian of marriage registry documents, who is cited herein in his official capacity as such and whose address for service is Makombe Complex, corner Herbert Chitepo and Harare Street. The fourth Respondent has been cited in his official capacity, and is responsible for issuing the marriage certificate and registering it as such. The 3rd Respondent actually acts as his agent. He is capable of withdrawing the marriage and preventing the 3rd Respondent from issuing out the marriage certificate.

Advertisement

6. I would also want to give details as regards the 3rd Respondent. The 3rd Respondent is going to preside over the marriage ceremony on the 15th of September 2012. See Annexure A, which is the wedding invitation. He is required in terms of tradition not to proceed with the marriage if any party including myself has any complaint against the parties getting married. Because of the status of the 1st Respondent, I would not get an opportunity to appear before the 3rd Respondent and object as required by tradition. In terms of tradition, the 3rd Respondent upon receiving my objection is supposed to adjourn the ceremony. This is not going to happen because I will not be allowed to appear before him at the ceremony on the 15th of September 2012.

7. I must point out that the aforesaid objection is only made at the ceremony before the parties are united in Holy Matrimony. I should hope and trust that after receiving this application, the 3rd Respondent will not proceed in performing the marriage ceremony as he is now aware that I am objecting to my husband marrying the 2nd Respondent.

8. The 1st Respondent is my husband who is married to me in terms of our customary law which marriage still subsists. The marriage details are contained in my affidavit in the application for maintenance under MC 2712/12, attached hereto as Annexure B.

9. The 2nd Respondent is the second wife of my husband, whom he has married in terms of African Customary Law but whom 1st Respondent is proposing to marry in terms of the Marriages Act, Chapter 5:11. This forms the basis of the present application.

10. This application is urgent for the following reasons;

a) The 1st and 2nd Respondents have invited people and are intending to get married on the 15th of September 2012, almost a week from today.

b) I only became aware firstly through rumours and only confirmed this today, the 6th of September 2012 when I managed to get hold of Annexure A and confirmed beyond any reasonable doubt that the 1st and 2nd Respondent intends to get married next week.
c) The intended marriage between 1st and 2nd Respondent is to effectively divorce me by operation of law.

11. Unless this Honourable Court stops the marriage, the 1stand 2nd Respondent will be married within the next 7 days. It is for this reason that this matter is very urgent. I have no other remedy other than to approach this Honourable Court for the relief I seek. As can be seen in the letter to the 1st Respondent, I have tried to engage my husband in the hope that these issues can be resolved amicably. My husband, I believe is still angry with me for the miscarriage. My husband I believe could be suffering from a psychological and mental problem as a result of this miscarriage

My husband has been looking forward to having a child with me and the issue of the child had bonded us very very close and he has not accepted the fact that I have had a miscarriage. The miscarriage has mentally devastated him and is using me as a scape goat. I have not blamed him for the miscarriage. I have accepted it as God’s will. My husband has not come to terms with this. He is mentally unstable in that he has gone to marry the 2nd Respondent whom he met a few months ago, whom he had not even introduced to his family and his family still considers me as his wife. This shows his mental state and that is why I question his mental ability to even engage in this marriage. I believe that he is taking his frustrations of the miscarriage by marrying the 2nd Respondent. I believe my husband needs psychological evaluation and assistance.

12. Despite all I have said above, I love him very much and would want to remain married to him. I believe that his psychological problems can be resolved by him seeking counseling from qualified psychologists or mental specialists. I have known him for a long time as we had been dating for some time before he married me. He is a good man and if he seeks psychological and psychiatric assistance, he can return to his old condition of being a caring and loving husband.
13. The basis of seeking an interdict against all the Respondents is for the following reasons,

a) If my husband marries the 2nd Respondent next week, by operation of law, I will seize to be his wife. This is the advise I have received from my lawyer, Mr Jonathan Samukange.

b) I will not be entitled to any of the privileges and rights that I have been entitled to as a spouse, such as conjugal rights, love, affection and companionship.

c) The marriage I have contracted with my husband in terms of African Customary Law and Tradition is potentially polygamous and this is the reason why when he married the 2nd Respondent I did not complain or protest. If my husband married the 2nd Respondent it mean I can no longer have sexual intercourse with him as this would mean if I were to do so I would be committing adultery.

14. I have been advised by Mr Jonathan Samukange, my lawyer that a number of other disadvantages will flow if my husband married the 2nd Respondent in terms of the Marriages Act Chapter 5:11 and that I will suffer irreparable prejudice. I must point out that my husband has never said it in my face that he no longer loves me. As stated above and in Annexure B, my husband has not spoken to me from the day I miscarried and when I was informed of the same.

15. I have a right to stop my husband from marrying the 2nd Respondent and I have no objection to him being married in terms of the African Customary Law as the 2nd Respondent is his second wife. That I am prepared to live with and to condone but I am not prepared to allow my husband to marry the 2nd Respondent in terms of the Marriages Act Chapter 5:11 and thereby rendering my marriage to him, which still subsists, void.

16. I must also point out that I will not give up my right to be my husband’s first wife. I believe I am entitled to protect my interests and rights and I can only do so by coming to this Honourable Court.
17. WHEREFORE, I pray for an order I terms of the draft.

THUS DONE AND SWORN TO AT HARARE THIS 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012.

SIGNED ……………………………………………….
LOCARDIA KARIMATSENGA

BEFORE ME …………………………………………………….
COMMISSIONER OF OATHS


IN THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE CASE NO…………………/12
HELD AT HARARE
In the matter between:
LOCARDIA KARIMATSENGA APPLICANT
AND
MORGAN RICHARD TSVANGIRAI 1st RESPONDENT
AND
ELIZABETH MACHEKA 2ND RESPONDENT
AND
BISHOP KADENGE 3RD RESPONDENT
AND

THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
TOBAIWA MUDEDE 4TH RESPONDENT

CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY


I, TAWANDA KANENGONI, a legal practitioner practicing under Messrs Munangati and Associates do hereby certify that this matter is urgent for one or more of the following reasons;
1. The 1st and 2nd Respondents are due to be married within the next seven days on the 15th of September 2012.

2. Applicant will suffer irreparable prejudice if 1st and 2nd Respondents proceed to marry on 15 September 2012 in that her marriage to the 1st Respondent, which still subsists, will become void by operation of the law.

3. The Applicant is entitled to protect her interests and rights as 1st Respondent’s wife. The law cannot allow a legally married wife to suddenly become a nobody without following the proper procedures prescribed.

4. If the 1st and 2nd Respondents get married, the Applicant’s rights including love, affection, companionship and consortium ominus vitae will be terminated by law.

5. I submit that this matter is of extreme national interest and should be resolved by the court on an urgent basis. The nation and the international community at large is interested in the outcome. This matter has been reported internationally and is on the electronic media today and has been on the Herald, Daily News and Newsday.

6. The effect of the event scheduled for the 15th of September 2012 is to render Applicant divorced to the 1st Respondent. This would mean that any post association of Applicant with 1st Respondent would be adulterous. This is obviously untenable and must be stopped now.

7. It is for these reason that this matter must be treated with urgency and the prominency that it deserves and that it should be allowed to be argued on the merits and urgency it deserves.
DATED AT HARARE THIS 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012.

SIGNED ………………………………………………..
TAWANDA KANENGONI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE CASE NO…………………/12
HELD AT HARARE
In the matter between:
LOCARDIA KARIMATSENGA APPLICANT
AND
MORGAN RICHARD TSVANGIRAI 1st RESPONDENT
AND
ELIZABETH MACHEKA 2ND RESPONDENT
AND
BISHOP KADENGE 3RD RESPONDENT
AND

THE REGISTRAR GENERAL
TOBAIWA MUDEDE 4TH RESPONDENT
PROVISIONAL ORDER

TAKE NOTICE THAT on the ……………. day of September 2012, Honourable Justice …………………………….. sitting at Harare, issued a Provisional Order shown overleaf. The annexed Chamber Application, Affidavits and documents were used in support of the Application for this Provisional Order.

If you intend to oppose the confirmation of this Provisional Order, you will have to file a Notice of Opposition on Form No. 29B, together with one or more opposing affidavits, with the Registrar of the High Court at Harare within ten (10) days after the date on which this Provisional Order and Annexures’ were served upon you. You will also have to serve a copy of the Notice of Opposition and affidavit/s on the Applicant at the address for service specified in the application.

If you do not file an Opposing Affidavit within the period specified above, this matter will be set down for hearing in the High Court at Harare without further notice to you and will be dealt with as an unopposed application for confirmation of the Provisional Order.

If you wish to have the Provisional Order changed or set aside sooner than the Rules of Court normally allow, and can show good cause for this, you would approach the Applicant’s Legal Practitioners to agree, in consultation with the Registrar, on a suitable hearing date. If this cannot be agreed or there is a great urgency, you make a Chamber Application to notice to the Applicant for directions from a judge as to when the matter may be argued.
DATE ………………………………………………

TERMS OF THE FINAL ORDER

1. That the Respondents are called upon to show cause why a final order should not be made in the following terms;

1. That the 1st and 2nd Respondents are interdicted from marrying each other in terms of the Marriages Act (Chapter 5:11) on the 15th of September 2012 or any other day.

1. That the 3rd Respondent and any other priests in his church or any other church are interdicted from consummating the marriage between the 1st and 2nd Respondent on the 15th of September 2012 or any other date.

1. That the 4th Respondent be interdicted from issuing a marriage certificate to the 1st and 2nd Respondents.

1. That the 1st Respondent pays costs of suit at an attorney and client scale.

INTERIM RELIEF GRANTED

Pending the return date and the determination of this matter, it is hereby ordered that:

a) That the 1st and 2nd Respondents are interdicted from marrying each other in
terms of the Marriages Act (Chapter 5:11) on the 15th of September 2012 or
any other day.

b) That the 3rd Respondent and any other priests in his church are interdicted from marrying the 1st and 2nd Respondent on the 15th of September 2012 or any other date.
c) That the 4th Respondent be interdicted from issuing a marriage certificate to the 1st and 2nd Respondents

DATED AT HARARE THIS 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012.


………………………………………………….
BY THE JUDGE/ REGISTRAR

Labels: COURTS, MDC, MORGAN TSVANGIRAI

posted by MrK @ 3:02 AM