Advocacy inspires Zimbabwe’s top Paralympian

Vimbai
Zvinowanda
from
Zvishavane
is
living
her
dream
of
being
one
of
Zimbabwe’s
top
athletes
after
qualifying
for
this
year’s
Paris
Paralympic
Games.

Zvinowanda,
an
amputee,
will
represent
the
country
in
the
T47
400-metre
category
at
the
global
event
after
excelling
at
the
recent
African
championships
held
in
Marrakech,
Morocco.

She
wants
to
inspire
young
people
with
disabilities
in
the
country,
and
she
partly
attributes
her
success
to
assistance
from
the
Zimbabwe
Parents
of
Handicapped
Children
Association
(ZPHCA).

“I
am
a
sportsperson,
and
the
ZPCHA
taught
us
as
young
people
with
disabilities
to
be
confident
because
lack
of
confidence
can
negatively
affect
your
performance,”
Zvinowanda
said.

“I
was
in
Morocco
last
month
because
of
sport and won
two
gold
medals.
It
was
not
something
I
was
expecting.”

The
rising
athlete
is
a
beneficiary
of
a
ZPHCA
advocacy
programme
being
implemented
in Epworth
(Harare),
Mutasa
(Manicaland),
Beitbridge
(Matabeleland
South),
and
Zvishavane
(Midlands)
to
strengthen
caregivers’
capacity
to
advocate
for
free
access
to
specialised
disability
services.

ZPHCA’s
initiative
is
part
of
a
programme
by
the
Ministry
of
Public
Service,
Labour
and
Social
Development
supported
by
UNICEF’s
Child
Protection
Fund
III
and
funded
by
the
Swedish
International
Development
Agency
(SIDA)
that
empowers
youths
with
disabilities
to
assert
their
rights.

“I
want
to
thank
UNICEF
and
the
ZPHCA
for
the
advocacy
training,”
Zvinowanda
said.
“They
taught
us
how
to
advocate
for
services
provided
by
different
government
departments
and targeted
at
youths
with
disabilities.

“I
learnt
that
when
one
has
challenges
like
lack
of
school
fees,
they
can
approach
the
Department
of
Social
Welfare,
and
we
were
taught
that
disability
does
not
mean
inability.”

She
wants
to
play
her
role
in
driving
projects
that
empower
people
with
disability
as
a
way
of
giving
back
to
the
organisations
that
she
says
changed
her
life.

“I
have
always
had
a
dream
to
help
people
with
disabilities,”
Zvinowanda
said.
“I
want
to
start
an
organisation
that
helps
people
with
disabilities,
and
I
already
have
a
name
for
it.”

Priscilla
Chibadza,
who
looks
after
an
11-year-old
grandson
with
cerebral
palsy
and
speech
impairment
from
Zvishavane’s
Ward
16,
said
ZPCHA’s
advocacy
training
had
given
her
hope
that
the rights
of
children
with
disabilities
would
be
protected.

“My
grandson
Takudzwa
suffers
from
cerebral
palsy
and
speech
impairment,”
Chibadza
said.
“He
lost
his
mother
to
breast
cancer,
and
I
had
to
take
him
in
because
his
father
was
finding
it
 challenging
to
take
care
of
him.

“We
didn’t
understand
Takudzwa’s
condition,
but
after
training
from
the
ZPCHA,
we
started
to
appreciate
that
children
with
disabilities
are
just
like
all
other
children.

“The
ZPHCA
taught
us
about
how
to
advocate
for
our
rights
as
parents
who
stay
with
children
with
disabilities.”

She
said
training
that
after
the
training,
she
was
able
to
access
the
Basic
Education
Assistance
Module
funds
to
enable
her
grandson
to
go
to
school.

“I
want
to
thank
UNICEF
and
the
government
for
ensuring
that
Takudzwa
is
provided
with
materials
for
his
education,”
Chibadza
said.

Martha
Mahachi
from
Zvishavane’s
Ward
10
said
she
could
send
her
14-year-old
daughter
to
school
after
the
ZPHCA’s
advocacy
training.

“Before
the
ZPHCA’s
intervention,
we
used
to
have
challenges
even
taking
the
children
to
the
hospital,
but
they
are
now
being
treated
for
free
after
their
disabilities
were
assessed
by
the
Department
of
Social
Development
Department
of
Social
Development
assessed
their
disabilities,
and
they
are
no
longer
compelled
to
pay
school
fees,”
Mahachi
said.

“I
have
a
stand
at
the
local
flea
market
where
I
used
to
pay
US$1
a
day
to
the council,
but
I
am
now
allowed
to
use
it
for
free
as
a
parent
of
a
child
with
disabilities
after
the
ZPHCA
helped
us
to
advocate
for
an
exemption.”


Changing
lives

Cresencia
Mangoye,
a
ZPHCA
founder
member
from
Harare
but
who
is
doing
voluntary
work
in
Zvishavane,
said
support
from
UNICEF
was
changing
the lives
of
children
with
disabilities
and
that
of
their
caregivers.

“I
am
here,
Zvishavane,
as
a
volunteer
with
Rose
Kamwendoin
Zvishavane.
Our
role
is
to
help
support
groups
with
advocacy,”
Mangoye
said.

“The
support
groups
have
been
very
effective
because
children
have
been
assisted
with
assistive
devices
and
welfare
issues.

“Caregivers
were
also
encouraged
to
organise
themselves
to get
housing
stands,
and
many
people
are
now
on
the
waiting
list.
I
am
very
grateful
to
UNICEF.”

ZPHCA
field
officer
for
Zvishavane Rose
Kamwendo
said
the
advocacy
training
had
made
a
huge
impact,
as
caregivers
and
youths
with
disabilities
were
now
proactive
in
advocating
for
their
rights.

“The
ZPHCA,
with
help
from
UNICEF, training
on
inclusive
parenting,
with
help
from
UNICEF,
has
conducted
training
on
inclusive
parenting,
and
we
are
also
doing
advocacy
to
help
parents
understand
the
rights
of
their
children
and
to
ensure
their
welfare,”
Kamwendo
said.

“On
behalf
of
the
ZPHCA, I
want
to
thank
UNICEF
for
helping
us
train
parents
of
children
with
disabilities
because
most
of
them
now
know
where
to
get
assistance,
whether
in
health,
education
or
their
general
well-being.”

The
programme
has
benefited
366
children
and
adolescents
with
disabilities
who
are
accessing
a
package
of
services
from
government
departments
responsible
for
providing
community-based
services
for
children
with
disabilities
in
the
targeted
districts.

Land Tenure Statement Issued by Government


Together
with
last
Tuesday’s
Post-Cabinet
Press
Briefing,
the
Cabinet
issued
a
statement
outlining
the
Government’s
policy
on
land
tenure. 
The
Statement
can
be
accessed
on
the
Veritas
website [link].

Before
analysing
the
Statement
we
should
point
out
that
it
gives
only
a
sketchy
outline
of
what
the
Government’s
policy
on
land
is
or
may
be

it
is
not
even
clear
if
a
policy
has
yet
been
fully
formulated. 
Many
important
issues
are
not
touched
on
in
the
Statement,
and
some
of
the
points
that
are
mentioned
raise
serious
concerns.

Summary
of
the
Statement

After
noting
that
the
land
reform
programme
was
carried
out
to
address
inequalities
that
existed
during
the
colonial
era
and
to
ensure
that
every
Zimbabwean
has
equitable
access
to
agricultural
land,
the
Statement
says
that
most
of
the
beneficiaries
of
the
programme
conduct
farming
as
a
business
and
that
young
people
account
for
a
significant
proportion
of
the
country’s
commercial
farmers. 
Beneficiaries,
the
Statement
says,
have
benefited
from
various
programmes
to
enhance
their
productivity
and
from
the
Government’s
provision
of
infrastructure
such
as
roads
and
dams.

Challenges

The
Statement
lists
several
challenges
to
the
success
of
the
programme:

  • Farmers
    face
    difficulties
    in
    accessing
    finance
    for
    their
    farming
    activities
  • Farmers
    do
    not
    have
    security
    of
    tenure
    and
    so
    have
    not
    fully
    developed
    their
    land
    holdings
  • Succession
    to
    farmers’
    land
    holdings
    after
    their
    death
    has
    created
    problems,
    because
    some
    holdings
    have
    been
    divided
    up
    among
    surviving
    relatives
  • Farmers
    have
    failed
    to
    repay
    loans
    given
    or
    guaranteed
    by
    the
    Government
  • Land
    barons
    have
    been
    allocating
    land
    for
    urban
    development
    without
    regard
    for
    planning
    laws.

New
measures

To
meet
the
challenges
the
Government
will
implement
the
following
measures:

  • Agricultural
    land
    held
    by
    farmers
    under
    99-year
    leases,
    offer
    letters
    and
    permits
    will
    be
    held
    under
    bankable,
    registrable
    and
    transferable
    documents
    of
    tenure. 
    This
    measure
    will
    “be
    informed
    by”
    the
    following
    guidelines:

o   Priority
will
be
given
to
war
veterans,
youths
and
women

o   Land
secured
by
the
new
documents
will
be
transferable
only
among
indigenous
Zimbabweans

o   The
documents
will
not
be
issued
for
Communal
Land.

  • There
    is
    an
    immediate
    and
    indefinite
    moratorium
    on
    the
    issue
    of
    new
    99-year
    leases,
    offer
    letters
    and
    permits
    for
    agricultural
    land.
  • Urban
    land
    will
    be
    made
    commercially
    available
    only
    to
    credible
    and
    approved
    land
    developers
    who
    will
    comply
    with
    the
    law,
    so
    that
    high-quality
    housing
    developments
    are
    established.
  • To
    oversee
    implementation
    of
    these
    measures
    the
    President
    has
    constituted
    a
    Cabinet
    Oversight
    Committee
    chaired
    by
    the
    Minister
    of
    Defence [why
    her?]

    There
    will
    also
    be
    a
    Land
    Tenure
    Implementation
    Committee.

Comments

The
Land
Tenure
Statement
is
couched
in
dense
officialese
which
is
sometimes
difficult
to
understand

perhaps
that
is
intentional

but
peering
through
the
murk
one
can
discern
some
problems:

Tenure
documents

The
“bankable,
registrable
and
transferable”
documents
of
tenure
have
been
mooted
for
a
long
time
but
have
yet
to
see
the
light
of
day. 
If
and
when
they
are
issued
they
will
remedy
at
least
one
of
the
problems
besetting
the
land
reform
programme: 
uncertainty
about
who
holds
the
land. 
Properly
drafted,
they
should
provide
evidence
of
the
identity
of
the
holders
of
the
land
and
the
boundaries
of
the
land
they
hold.

On
the
other
hand,
by
emphasising
documents
of
tenure
the
Statement
is
putting
the
cart
before
the
horse,
because
it
is
silent
about
the
nature
of
the
tenure
under
which
farmers
will
hold
their
land. 
Will
it
be
ownership? 
Will
it
be
lease

and
if
so,
for
how
long
will
the
leases
last
and
under
what
circumstances
will
they
be
cancelled? 
These
are
the
factors
that
will
determine
whether
farmers’
tenure
is
secure
or
precarious. 
Documents
of
tenure
or
title
will
provide
evidence
of
who
holds
rights
over
the
land,
but
the
holders’
security
of
tenure
will
depend
on
the
nature
and
extent
of
those
rights.

It
is
nearly
25
years
since
the
Land
Reform
Programme
began,
and
one
would
have
expected
the
Government
to
have
worked
out
by
now
what
form
of
land
tenure
beneficiaries
of
the
programme
should
enjoy. 
If
the
Government
has
indeed
decided
on
a
land
tenure
system
the
Statement
should
have
set
it
out.

“Bankable”
documents?

When
the
Statement
refers
to
“bankable”
documents
of
tenure,
it
presumably
means
documents
that
will
be
accepted
by
banks
as
security
for
loans. 
This
is
shorthand
for
saying
that
farmers
will
be
able
to
mortgage
their
land
as
collateral
for
loans
they
take
out
with
financial
institutions. 
Several
points
arise
here:

  • When
    deciding
    to
    grant
    a
    farmer
    a
    loan,
    a
    financial
    institution
    makes
    a
    commercial
    decision
    based
    on
    the
    likelihood
    of
    the
    farmer
    repaying
    the
    money
    lent. 
    The
    financial
    institution
    takes
    many
    factors
    into
    account:
     the
    farmer’s
    competence,
    for
    example,
    and
    what
    the
    money
    will
    be
    used
    for. 
    The
    security
    for
    the
    loan
    is
    only
    one
    of
    those
    factors.
  • A
    financial
    institution
    will
    not
    accept
    a
    mortgage
    over
    a
    farmer’s
    land
    as
    security
    for
    a
    loan
    unless
    the
    institution
    is
    able
    to
    foreclose
    the
    mortgage
    in
    the
    event
    that
    the
    farmer
    fails
    to
    repay
    the
    loan

    that
    is,
    unless
    the
    institution
    can
    have
    the
    farmer
    evicted
    from
    the
    land
    and
    the
    land
    resold
    to
    someone
    else
    at
    a
    price
    which
    allows
    the
    institution
    to
    recover
    what
    it
    lent
    to
    the
    farmer.
  • The
    Government
    cannot
    simply
    order
    financial
    institutions
    to
    accept
    tenure
    documents
    as
    security
    for
    loans. 
    Unless
    the
    above
    conditions
    are
    met,
    financial
    institutions
    will
    not
    lend
    money
    to
    farmers.

Non-indigenous
Zimbabweans

Having
recorded
that
the
objectives
of
the
Land
Reform
Programme
were
to
“divest
ownership
of
agricultural
land
from
the
minority
white
farmers
to
the
black
majority
people
of
Zimbabwe”
and
also
“to
ensure
that
every
Zimbabwean
had
equitable
access
to
this
finite
resource”,
the
Statement
goes
on
to
say:

“Security
of
tenure
to
all
land
regularised
under
this
programme,
will
at
all
time[s]
only
be
transferable
among
indigenous
Zimbabweans”.

If
this
means
what
it
seems
to
mean,
that
agricultural
land
will
be
transferable
only
to
indigenous
Zimbabweans
and
that
non-indigenous
Zimbabwean
citizens
will
not
be
allowed
to
hold
agricultural
land,
then
it
is
unconstitutional. 
One
of
the
principles
guiding
policies
on
agricultural
land,
set
out
in
section
289
of
the
Constitution,
is:

“Subject
to
section
72
[which
deals
with
the
compulsory
acquisition
of
land],
every
Zimbabwean
citizen
has
a
right
to
acquire,
hold,
occupy,
use,
transfer,
hypothecate,
lease
or
dispose
of
agricultural
land
regardless
of
his
or
her
race
or
colour”

That
principle
must
be
observed
whenever
the
State
alienates
agricultural
land
in
terms
of
section
293
of
the
Constitution.

The
Government
needs
to
clarify
whether
non-indigenous
Zimbabwean
citizens
who
are
currently
occupying
agricultural
land
will
be
allowed
to
continue
occupying
it,
and
whether
and
under
what
conditions
non-indigenous
citizens
will
be
allowed
to
acquire
agricultural
land
in
the
future.  The
government
also
needs
to
clarify
the
rights
of
farmers
who
hold
land
protected
by
BIPPA
agreements

Current
holders
of
agricultural
land

Not
only
is
the
Statement
unclear
about
the
rights
of
non-indigenous
citizens
who
are
occupying
agricultural
land,
it
is
not
very
clear
about
the
rights
of
indigenous
citizens
who
are
current
occupying
it. 
The
Statement
says
the
new
policy
of
issuing
secure
documents
of
tenure
will
be
“informed
by”
guidelines,
the
first
of
which
is
that
preference
will
be
given
to
veterans
of
the
Liberation
Struggle,
youths
and
women. 
Surely
preference
must
be
given
to
persons
who
are
currently
in
lawful
occupation
of
the
land,
whatever
their
background,
age
or
gender? 
If
they
are
not
to
be
given
preference,
are
they
to
be
evicted
in
favour
of
new
occupants

are
we,
in
other
words,
going
to
have
a
new
round
of
evictions
and
resettlements? 
Surely
not.

Farmers
who
are
currently
in
lawful
occupation
of
agricultural
land
have
vested
rights
to
their
land. 
The
Government
must
show
due
respect
for
those
vested
rights
as
it
is
required
to
do
by
section
3(2)(k)
of
the
Constitution.

Current
holders
of
urban
land

The
Statement
says
that
the
activities
of
“land
barons”
have
overstretched
local
authorities’
resources
and
that
the
Government
proposes
to
put
a
stop
to
their
activities,
but
it
does
not
indicate
how
the
Government
proposes
to
remedy
the
damage
they
have
already
caused. 
Our
main
cities
are
surrounded
by
unplanned
and
illegal
settlements,
many
of
them
lacking
essential
services
and
infrastructure. 
These
settlements
have
increased
the
size
of
Harare
by
20
per
cent,
and
some
of
them
overlap
the
city
boundaries
and
extend
into
neighbouring
rural
areas. 
The
Statement
has
nothing
to
say
about
what
will
happen
to
them. 
Will
they
be
demolished? 
Will
they
be
regularised,
with
their
occupants
receiving
title
to
their
land? 
The
Statement’s
silence
suggests
the
Government
has
no
answers
to
these
pressing
questions.

A
further
point
is
that
the
Statement
suggests
that
the
Government
will
put
a
stop
to
the
land
barons’
activities. 
This
is
the
responsibility
of
the
municipal
and
town
councils
whose
land
is
being
sold
off
by
the
barons. 
Rather
than
take
action
itself,
the
Government
should
assist
the
councils
to
regularise
the
position.

Paying
for
the
land

The
Statement
gives
no
inkling
about
how
the
costs
of
resettlement
are
to
be
met. 
The
Government
has
expended
vast
amounts
of
money
in
providing
new
farmers
with
inputs,
in
lending
them
money
and
in
guaranteeing
their
loans
from
financial
institutions. 
Most
of
those
loans
have
not
been
repaid. 
There
is
no
indication
of
how
the
Government
will
recoup
its
expenditure.

The
Statement
also
does
not
indicate
how
the
new
farmers
are
going
to
be
brought
within
the
tax
system
of
rural
district
councils
and
contribute
their
fair
share
towards
the
councils’
revenues.

A
comprehensive
land
policy
is
needed

It
seems
illogical
to
exclude
Communal
Land

which
is
mostly
agricultural

from
an
agricultural
land
policy. 
Admittedly
different
considerations
apply
to
Communal
Land
from
those
applicable
to
land
held
under
individual
title,
but
an
integrated
land
policy
which
aims
at
increasing
agricultural
production
should
take
all
rural
land
into
account.

Conclusion

Agriculture
is
the
bedrock
of
our
economy
and
giving
farmers
secure
title
will
encourage
them
to
unlock
the
full
value
of
their
land. 
It
is
unfortunate
that
the
Government’s
statement
does
not
provide
information
on
what
title
farmers
will
be
given
and
how
secure
their
title
will
be. 
It
is
doubly
unfortunate
that
the
Government’s
brief
statement
raises
so
many
problems
and
unanswered
questions.



Veritas
makes
every
effort
to
ensure
reliable
information,
but
cannot
take
legal
responsibility
for
information
supplied.

Post
published
in:

Featured

Free seed, fertilizer distribution in disarray over US$300 million debt to suppliers

HARARE

A
scheme
designed
to
give
farmers
free
access
to
seed
and
fertilizer,
backed
by
treasury,
is
facing
major
hurdles
after
it
was
revealed
that
the
government
owes
suppliers
in
excess
of
US$300
million.

The
seed
and
fertilizer
is
doled
out
to
communal
farmers
for
free
under
a
“presidential
inputs
scheme”
known
as
Pfumvudza/Intwasa.

Obert
Jiri,
the
secretary
in
the
lands
ministry,
told
parliament’s
public
accounts
committee
on
Monday
that
the
government
had
failed
to
pay
seed
and
fertilizer
companies
for
the
past
three
years.

“The
main
challenge
is
certainly
the
financing
of
this
programme.
Our
contractors

FSG
Fertilizer,
ZFC
Fertilizer
and
Quton
Seed

they
are
owed
in
excess
of
US$300
million
for
the
2020/2021
season,
2021/2022
season
and
the
2022
/2023
season.
So
we
owe
them
quite
a
lot,
and
this
is
what
delays
the
movement
of
inputs,
because
if
we
don’t
pay,
they
cannot
move
the
inputs,”
he
said


“We
wanted
to
be
as
early
as
we
must
at
this
particular
time,
but
the
cropping
season
is
now
starting,
and
we
have
out
there
50
percent
of
our
seed,
49
percent
of
our
compound
D
fertilizer,
which
is
the
major
bulk
input.”

Jiri
said
if
the
money
was
found
today,
“we
should
be
done
moving
the
fertilizer
by
mid-November.”

He
still
hoped
that
maize
seed
deliveries
to
districts
could
still
be
done
by
the
end
of
the
first
week
of
November,
but
the
cash
crunch
would
affect
traditional
grains
because
“some
of
it
has
to
be
imported.”

The
government
is
targeting
to
supply
seed
and
fertilizer
to
about
3,5
million
households
under
the
scheme
this
year.

Zimbabwe’s
2023/24
farming
season
was
a
disaster
after
limited
rainfall
hit
production.
Normal
rainfall
is
expected
this
cropping
season
but
delayed
assistance
to
farmers
in
need
of
inputs
could
also
affect
production
and
perpetuate
the
country’s
food
deficit.

Mpofu, Chimombe take aim at Reza as they continue freedom bid in court

HARARE

Corruption-accused
business
partners
Moses
Mpofu
and
Mike
Chimombe
took
the
witness
stand
on
Tuesday
as
they
asked
a
court
to
refer
their
case
to
the
Constitutional
Court.

Appearing
before
Justice
Pisirayi
Kwenda
of
the
Harare
High
Court,
the
duo
argued
that
their
rights
to
liberty
and
legal
protection
were
violated
by
Michael
Reza,
the
head
of
the
Zimbabwe
Anti-Corruption
Commission
(ZACC),
when
he
stopped
their
release
on
bail.

Under
the
guidance
of
their
lawyer,
Ashiel
Mugiya,
Mpofu
expressed
his
astonishment
upon
being
charged
in
connection
with
a
tender
to
supply
goats
to
the
government,
when
an
initial
invitation
to
speak
to
investigators
from
the
Zimbabwe
Anti-Corruption
commission
stated
that
he
would
be
answering
questions
over
alleged
corruption
in
over
US$100
million
in
contracts
awarded
by
the
Zimbabwe
Electoral
Commission
to
South
African
company,
Ren-Form
CC
and
its
business
partner,
Wicknell
Chivayo.

“I
was
in
China
when
I
started
receiving
calls
and
messages
from
friends
and
family
who
informed
me
that
I
was
being
sought
by
ZACC.
The
situation
was
also
circulating
on
social
media,
where
the
ZACC
chairperson
(Reza)
commented
on
leaked
audio
recordings
(of
Chivayo).
He
said
they
had
evidence
(about
ZEC
contracts
corruption)
and
wished
to
interview
myself,
Mike
Chimombe,
and
Chivayo,”
he
explained.


Mpofu
said
upon
their
return
to
Zimbabwe,
they
attended
an
appointment
at
ZACC
with
their
lawyers,
anticipating
an
interview
about
the
ZEC
tender.

Instead,
they
were
solely
questioned
about
allegations
that
they
had
been
given
millions
of
dollars
by
the
lands
ministry
to
buy
86,000
goats
and
they
had
only
supplied
6,978.

Chimombe
supported
Mpofu’s
testimony,
claiming
selective
prosecution
in
their
case
since
Chivayo

who
was
their
business
partner
when
they
won
the
initial
ZEC
contracts
worth
US$40
million

had
not
been
called
in
for
questioning.

The
two
asserted
that
their
prosecution
was
a
direct
result
of
the
leaked
Chivayo
audios
over
the
ZEC
contracts.
They
were
being
punished
because
a
large
chunk
of
the
cash
had
gone
to
senior
government
officials
who
facilitated
the
corruption.
These
powerful
people,
they
said,
wanted
to
cover
up
their
corruption
and
had
fashioned
the
charges
against
them
to
shield
Chivayo.

“When
we
had
a
meeting
with
Chivayo
on
the
payment
modalities,
he
told
us
that
the
money
was
not
going
to
be
shared
equally,
he
said
the
bulk
of
the
money
was
supposed
to
go
to
his
people
in
government
and
we
were
not
going
to
get
a
fair
share,”
Mpofu
told
the
court.

Mpofu
and
Chimombe
noted
that
they
had
seen
Reza
present
in
court
prior
to
their
first
appearance
and
remarked
that
the
prosecutor
general
had
agreed
to
grant
them
bail.

Despite
the
fact
that
the prosecutor
general
had
initially
set
conditions
requiring
them
to
surrender
their
title
deeds,
passports,
and
pay
US$1,000
bail
each,
Reza
altered
those
terms.
This
resulted
in
them
being
denied
bail.

The
hearing
continues.

High Court gives magistrate a lesson in legal proceedings

Nembaware
was
presiding
over
a
case
involving
three
men—Shelton
Dube
(21),
Sibangiswani
Ncube
(48),
and
Gilbert
Ncube—who
faced
stock
theft
charges
after
allegedly
stealing
18
cattle.

He
denied
bail
to
the
accused
and
ordered
the
case
to
proceed
to
trial.

The
suspects,
represented
by
lawyer
Nqobani
Sithole,
then
applied
for
Nembaware
to
recuse
himself,
alleging
bias.

Nembaware
rejected
the
application,
prompting
the
suspects
to
seek
a
High
Court
review.

While
the
High
Court
was
considering
their
review
application,
the
trial
began
in
the
lower
court.

However,
Justice
Moyo,
hearing
the
unopposed
review
application,
ruled
in
favour
of
the
suspects
and
ordered
that
a
different
magistrate
take
over
the
case.

On
October
9,
Nembaware
sought
clarification
from
the
High
Court
Registrar,
questioning
whether
the
trial
should
restart.

“On
the
3rd
of
October
2024,
the
Honourable
Judge
Mrs.
Justice
Moyo
J
issued
an
order
ordering
the
1st
Respondent
(Nembaware)
to
recuse
himself
from
presiding
over
the
above
matter.
The
trial
of
the
matter
had
already
commenced
and
the
state
had
closed
its
case.
The
Honourable
Judge
ordered
that
the
trial
be
commenced
before
a
different
Magistrate.
The
Honourable
Judge,
however,
did
not
order
a
trial
de
novo.
Kindly
bring
this
to
the
attention
of
the
Judge
so
that
she
gives
directions,”
Nembaware
wrote.

In
her
response,
Justice
Moyo
provided
a
detailed
explanation.

“The
effect
of
the
order
is
to
set
aside
the
proceedings
before
first
respondent
and
to
have
them
commenced
before
a
different
magistrate
as
the
order
speaks
to
that.
It’s
either
proceedings
are
ordered
to
commence,
which
means
to
start,
to
begin
before
a
different
magistrate
or
the
term
de
novo
is
used
without
the
term
commence
as
the
2
cannot
be
used
together,
they
become
superfluous.
It
is
either
the
proceedings
commence
before
a
different
magistrate
or
a
trial
de
novo
is
ordered
before
a
different
magistrate.

De
novo
itself
is
a
Latin
term
which
means
anew,
start
again,
to
begin
which
is
a
synonym
of
commence,
which
is
to
begin
or
start.
So,
the
proceedings
must
be
initiated
by
a
different
magistrate,
the
order
is
very
clear.
Moreso,
the
order
has
already
set
aside
what
has
been
done
so
far
by
1st
Respondent,
so
it
is
no
longer
there
for
another
magistrate
to
continue
with
except
to
commence(start)”.

The
state
alleges
that
on
January
28,
at
Lydead
Farm,
the
accused
had
plotted
to
steal
cattle
from
grazing
paddocks.
Acting
on
a
tip-off,
police
intercepted
the
trio
as
they
were
driving
the
cattle
away,
leading
to
their
arrest.

David Mnangagwa’s driver dies suddenly at Bulawayo hotel after conference

HARARE

Deputy
finance
minister
David
Mnangagwa’s
driver
died
suddenly
at
his
hotel
room
on
Sunday,
hours
after
the
Zanu
PF
annual
conference
ended
in
Bulawayo,
ZimLive
can
reveal.

It
is
the
latest
mishap
to
befall
President
Emmerson
Mnangagwa’s
son
whose
Harare
home,
which
is
guarded
by
police,
was
broken
into
twice
and
eventually
set
on
fire
by
unknown
individuals
in
June
this
year.

Police
were
called
to
the
Greys
Inn
hotel
in
the
early
hours
of
Sunday,
October
27,
where
they
found
Ishmael
Maburisa
already
dead.

Hotel
sources
said
they
suspected
that
he
died
from
diabetic
shock.


Before
his
death,
Maburisa
had
appeared
at
the
hotel’s
reception
shouting
“get
me
food
please”
several
times.
It
is
thought
he
was
having
an
episode
of
hypoglycemia
or
low
blood
glucose
levels
which
can
be
reversed
by
eating
or
drinking
carbohydrates.

“They
gave
him
porridge,
the
only
food
that
was
there.
He
went
back
to
his
room
but
after
a
short
period
he
started
twitching
and
convulsing
as
though
he
was
having
an
epileptic
episode
and
he
unfortunately
died,”
the
source
said.

Police
attended
the
scene
and
found
diabetes
medication
in
his
room.

An
internal
police
memo
of
the
incident,
seen
by
ZimLive,
identified
Maburisa
as
David
Mnangagwa’s
driver.

It
is
not
clear
if
the
deputy
minister
was
still
in
Bulawayo
when
Maburisa
died,
or
had
flown
back
to
Harare
at
the
end
of
the
Zanu
PF
conference
on
Saturday.

Police
declined
to
comment.

Unknown
individuals
broke
into
the
Borrowdale
home
of
the
president’s
son
on
June
23
and
again
on
June
25.
In
the
second
incident,
three
bullets
were
left
outside
his
bedroom
door
and
three
more
outside
the
house.

Then,
on
June
28, the
house
caught
fire
 under
unclear
circumstances.

Trump Campaign Cries Voter Suppression, Scores Win For… Ballot Access? – Above the Law

A
week
ago,
Trump

explained

to
podcaster
Joe
Rogan
that
the
2020
election
was
stolen
because
courts
improperly
expanded
access
to
the
ballot.

“They
were
supposed
to
get
legislative
approval
to
do
the
things
they
did,
and
they
didn’t
get
it
in
many
cases,
They
didn’t
get
it,”
the
former
president
rambled.
“Like
for
extensions
of
the
voting,
for
voting
earlier.
All
these.
different
things,
By
law,
they
had
to
get
legislative
approvals.
You
don’t
have
to
go
any
further
than
that.”

Naturally,
Trump
didn’t
invoke
the
words
“independent
state
legislature
theory”

too
many
syllables,
and
he
likely
doesn’t
even
understand
what
it
is.
But
his
point
was
pretty
much
the
definition
of
the
ISL,
which
has
taken
hold
in
the
GOP
since
their
fraud
claims
fizzled
out.
They
insist
that
court
orders
and
actions
taken
by
election
officials
to
expand
access
to
the
ballot
violate
the
Constitution’s
Elections
Clause,
which
provides
that
“The
Times,
Places
and
Manner
of
holding
Elections
for
Senators
and
Representatives,
shall
be
prescribed
in
each
State
by
the
Legislature
thereof;
but
the
Congress
may
at
any
time
by
Law
make
or
alter
such
Regulations,
except
as
to
the
Places
of
chusing
Senators.”

ISL
has
its
roots
in

Bush
v.
Gore
,
in
which
the
Rehnquist
Court
opined
that
each
state
legislature’s
authority
was
“plenary,”
and
it
could
even
cancel
elections
and
simply
award
electoral
votes
as
it
saw
fit.
A
few
Republican
politicians,
such
as
Maryland’s
Rep.
Andy
Harris,
are
now
openly
advocating
for
state
legislatures
to
do
just
that
this
cycle.
But
most
have
retreated
to

mumbling

like
House
Majority
Leader
Steve
Scalise
that
“There
were
a
few
states
that
did
not
follow
their
state
laws.
That’s
really
the
dispute
that
you’ve
seen
continue
on.”

And
yet
the
RNC
has
zero
problem
running
to
the
courts
to
get
them
to
change
the
rules
set
out
by
the
legislature
when
it’s
their
voters
(maybe!)
getting
the
short
end
of
the
stick.

The
issue
arose
in
Bucks
County,
where
there
were
long
lines
on
the
last
day
to
register
and
vote
absentee.

The
state
does
not
permit
in-person
early
voting,
but
it
does

allow

voters
to
fill
out
an
absentee
ballot
in
person
and
return
it
immediately.
That
process
requires
several
minutes
of
interface
with
election
clerks
for
every
ballot,
though,
and
takes
substantially
longer
than
simply
walking
in
and
voting
on
a
machine.
It
should
be
noted
that
this
logjam
was
virtually
guaranteed
by
Republican
state
legislators,
who
refuse
to
make
it
easier
to
cast
a
ballot
in
the
Commonwealth;
and
by
Republicans,
who
fearmonger
about
drop
boxes
so
aggressively
that
their
own
voters
are
terrified
to
use
them.

By

statute
,
the
last
day
to
request
an
absentee
ballot
is
seven
days
before
the
election,
i.e.
Tuesday
October
29.
According
to
the


Philadelphia
Inquirer
,
election
officials
in
Bucks
County
told
voters
who
were
in
line
by
2:30
on
Tuesday
that
they
could
fill
out
the
forms
and
cast
their
absentee
ballots
that
day.
Everyone
who
was
in
line
by
5
could
request
a
ballot
and
either
receive
it
by
mail
or
pick
it
up
later
in
the
week.
But
that
didn’t
stop
Republicans
from
claiming
that
the
long
lines
were
evidence
of
an
effort
to
suppress
the
votes
of
Trump
supporters.

Here’s
RNC
Chair
Michael
Whatley,
along
with
Val
Biancaniello,
a
PA
GOP
official
in
Delaware
County
who

got
herself
arrested

for
harassing
voters
in
line
to
cast
absentee
ballots
on
Monday.

https://x.com/ChairmanWhatley/status/1851393618365362352

In
2020,
President
Biden
took
63
percent
of
the
vote
in
Delaware
County,
and
52
percent
in
Bucks
County.
Nevertheless,
Whatley

tweeted

that
Biancaniello’s
arrest
“follows
reports
from
across
the
commonwealth
that
voters
are
being
turned
away
in
conservative
areas.”

The
RNC
and
the
Trump
campaign
characterized
attempts
to
manage
the
line
of
voters
as
“voter
suppression,”
and
they
filed

suit

in
the
Bucks
County
Court
of
Common
Pleas
alleging
that
officials
had
violated
the
law
by
not
allowing
everyone
in
line
by
5
to
cast
their
vote
on
site
that
day.
The

statute
,
and
indeed
the
complaint
itself,
are
a
little
unclear
as
to
whether
voters
have
the
right
to
vote
absentee
in
person,
or
simply
to
request
the
ballot
by
the
deadline.
But
the
petitioners
got
their
wish,
with
Judge
Jeffrey
Trauger
granting
a

preliminary
injunction

ordering
election
officials
to
continue
to
process
and
accept
absentee
ballot
requests
through
November
1.

Because
sending
out
absentee
ballots
requests
to
all
voters,
accepting
ballots
in
the
park,
ballot
drop
boxes,
and
court-mandated
voting
modifications
during
a
pandemic
are
illegal.
But
having
a
court
order
two
more
days
of
early
voting
is
totally
kosher.
And
Trump
will
explain
that
fine
distinction
to
Joe
Rogan
when
he
runs
again
in
2028.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Trump Campaign Cries Voter Suppression, Scores Win For… Ballot Access? – Above the Law

A
week
ago,
Trump

explained

to
podcaster
Joe
Rogan
that
the
2020
election
was
stolen
because
courts
improperly
expanded
access
to
the
ballot.

“They
were
supposed
to
get
legislative
approval
to
do
the
things
they
did,
and
they
didn’t
get
it
in
many
cases,
They
didn’t
get
it,”
the
former
president
rambled.
“Like
for
extensions
of
the
voting,
for
voting
earlier.
All
these.
different
things,
By
law,
they
had
to
get
legislative
approvals.
You
don’t
have
to
go
any
further
than
that.”

Naturally,
Trump
didn’t
invoke
the
words
“independent
state
legislature
theory”

too
many
syllables,
and
he
likely
doesn’t
even
understand
what
it
is.
But
his
point
was
pretty
much
the
definition
of
the
ISL,
which
has
taken
hold
in
the
GOP
since
their
fraud
claims
fizzled
out.
They
insist
that
court
orders
and
actions
taken
by
election
officials
to
expand
access
to
the
ballot
violate
the
Constitution’s
Elections
Clause,
which
provides
that
“The
Times,
Places
and
Manner
of
holding
Elections
for
Senators
and
Representatives,
shall
be
prescribed
in
each
State
by
the
Legislature
thereof;
but
the
Congress
may
at
any
time
by
Law
make
or
alter
such
Regulations,
except
as
to
the
Places
of
chusing
Senators.”

ISL
has
its
roots
in

Bush
v.
Gore
,
in
which
the
Rehnquist
Court
opined
that
each
state
legislature’s
authority
was
“plenary,”
and
it
could
even
cancel
elections
and
simply
award
electoral
votes
as
it
saw
fit.
A
few
Republican
politicians,
such
as
Maryland’s
Rep.
Andy
Harris,
are
now
openly
advocating
for
state
legislatures
to
do
just
that
this
cycle.
But
most
have
retreated
to

mumbling

like
House
Majority
Leader
Steve
Scalise
that
“There
were
a
few
states
that
did
not
follow
their
state
laws.
That’s
really
the
dispute
that
you’ve
seen
continue
on.”

And
yet
the
RNC
has
zero
problem
running
to
the
courts
to
get
them
to
change
the
rules
set
out
by
the
legislature
when
it’s
their
voters
(maybe!)
getting
the
short
end
of
the
stick.

The
issue
arose
in
Bucks
County,
where
there
were
long
lines
on
the
last
day
to
register
and
vote
absentee.

The
state
does
not
permit
in-person
early
voting,
but
it
does

allow

voters
to
fill
out
an
absentee
ballot
in
person
and
return
it
immediately.
That
process
requires
several
minutes
of
interface
with
election
clerks
for
every
ballot,
though,
and
takes
substantially
longer
than
simply
walking
in
and
voting
on
a
machine.
It
should
be
noted
that
this
logjam
was
virtually
guaranteed
by
Republican
state
legislators,
who
refuse
to
make
it
easier
to
cast
a
ballot
in
the
Commonwealth;
and
by
Republicans,
who
fearmonger
about
drop
boxes
so
aggressively
that
their
own
voters
are
terrified
to
use
them.

By

statute
,
the
last
day
to
request
an
absentee
ballot
is
seven
days
before
the
election,
i.e.
Tuesday
October
29.
According
to
the


Philadelphia
Inquirer
,
election
officials
in
Bucks
County
told
voters
who
were
in
line
by
2:30
on
Tuesday
that
they
could
fill
out
the
forms
and
cast
their
absentee
ballots
that
day.
Everyone
who
was
in
line
by
5
could
request
a
ballot
and
either
receive
it
by
mail
or
pick
it
up
later
in
the
week.
But
that
didn’t
stop
Republicans
from
claiming
that
the
long
lines
were
evidence
of
an
effort
to
suppress
the
votes
of
Trump
supporters.

Here’s
RNC
Chair
Michael
Whatley,
along
with
Val
Biancaniello,
a
PA
GOP
official
in
Delaware
County
who

got
herself
arrested

for
harassing
voters
in
line
to
cast
absentee
ballots
on
Monday.

https://x.com/ChairmanWhatley/status/1851393618365362352

In
2020,
President
Biden
took
63
percent
of
the
vote
in
Delaware
County,
and
52
percent
in
Bucks
County.
Nevertheless,
Whatley

tweeted

that
Biancaniello’s
arrest
“follows
reports
from
across
the
commonwealth
that
voters
are
being
turned
away
in
conservative
areas.”

The
RNC
and
the
Trump
campaign
characterized
attempts
to
manage
the
line
of
voters
as
“voter
suppression,”
and
they
filed

suit

in
the
Bucks
County
Court
of
Common
Pleas
alleging
that
officials
had
violated
the
law
by
not
allowing
everyone
in
line
by
5
to
cast
their
vote
on
site
that
day.
The

statute
,
and
indeed
the
complaint
itself,
are
a
little
unclear
as
to
whether
voters
have
the
right
to
vote
absentee
in
person,
or
simply
to
request
the
ballot
by
the
deadline.
But
the
petitioners
got
their
wish,
with
Judge
Jeffrey
Trauger
granting
a

preliminary
injunction

ordering
election
officials
to
continue
to
process
and
accept
absentee
ballot
requests
through
November
1.

Because
sending
out
absentee
ballots
requests
to
all
voters,
accepting
ballots
in
the
park,
ballot
drop
boxes,
and
court-mandated
voting
modifications
during
a
pandemic
are
illegal.
But
having
a
court
order
two
more
days
of
early
voting
is
totally
kosher.
And
Trump
will
explain
that
fine
distinction
to
Joe
Rogan
when
he
runs
again
in
2028.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Trump Campaign Cries Voter Suppression, Scores Win For… Ballot Access? – Above the Law

A
week
ago,
Trump

explained

to
podcaster
Joe
Rogan
that
the
2020
election
was
stolen
because
courts
improperly
expanded
access
to
the
ballot.

“They
were
supposed
to
get
legislative
approval
to
do
the
things
they
did,
and
they
didn’t
get
it
in
many
cases,
They
didn’t
get
it,”
the
former
president
rambled.
“Like
for
extensions
of
the
voting,
for
voting
earlier.
All
these.
different
things,
By
law,
they
had
to
get
legislative
approvals.
You
don’t
have
to
go
any
further
than
that.”

Naturally,
Trump
didn’t
invoke
the
words
“independent
state
legislature
theory”

too
many
syllables,
and
he
likely
doesn’t
even
understand
what
it
is.
But
his
point
was
pretty
much
the
definition
of
the
ISL,
which
has
taken
hold
in
the
GOP
since
their
fraud
claims
fizzled
out.
They
insist
that
court
orders
and
actions
taken
by
election
officials
to
expand
access
to
the
ballot
violate
the
Constitution’s
Elections
Clause,
which
provides
that
“The
Times,
Places
and
Manner
of
holding
Elections
for
Senators
and
Representatives,
shall
be
prescribed
in
each
State
by
the
Legislature
thereof;
but
the
Congress
may
at
any
time
by
Law
make
or
alter
such
Regulations,
except
as
to
the
Places
of
chusing
Senators.”

ISL
has
its
roots
in

Bush
v.
Gore
,
in
which
the
Rehnquist
Court
opined
that
each
state
legislature’s
authority
was
“plenary,”
and
it
could
even
cancel
elections
and
simply
award
electoral
votes
as
it
saw
fit.
A
few
Republican
politicians,
such
as
Maryland’s
Rep.
Andy
Harris,
are
now
openly
advocating
for
state
legislatures
to
do
just
that
this
cycle.
But
most
have
retreated
to

mumbling

like
House
Majority
Leader
Steve
Scalise
that
“There
were
a
few
states
that
did
not
follow
their
state
laws.
That’s
really
the
dispute
that
you’ve
seen
continue
on.”

And
yet
the
RNC
has
zero
problem
running
to
the
courts
to
get
them
to
change
the
rules
set
out
by
the
legislature
when
it’s
their
voters
(maybe!)
getting
the
short
end
of
the
stick.

The
issue
arose
in
Bucks
County,
where
there
were
long
lines
on
the
last
day
to
register
and
vote
absentee.

The
state
does
not
permit
in-person
early
voting,
but
it
does

allow

voters
to
fill
out
an
absentee
ballot
in
person
and
return
it
immediately.
That
process
requires
several
minutes
of
interface
with
election
clerks
for
every
ballot,
though,
and
takes
substantially
longer
than
simply
walking
in
and
voting
on
a
machine.
It
should
be
noted
that
this
logjam
was
virtually
guaranteed
by
Republican
state
legislators,
who
refuse
to
make
it
easier
to
cast
a
ballot
in
the
Commonwealth;
and
by
Republicans,
who
fearmonger
about
drop
boxes
so
aggressively
that
their
own
voters
are
terrified
to
use
them.

By

statute
,
the
last
day
to
request
an
absentee
ballot
is
seven
days
before
the
election,
i.e.
Tuesday
October
29.
According
to
the


Philadelphia
Inquirer
,
election
officials
in
Bucks
County
told
voters
who
were
in
line
by
2:30
on
Tuesday
that
they
could
fill
out
the
forms
and
cast
their
absentee
ballots
that
day.
Everyone
who
was
in
line
by
5
could
request
a
ballot
and
either
receive
it
by
mail
or
pick
it
up
later
in
the
week.
But
that
didn’t
stop
Republicans
from
claiming
that
the
long
lines
were
evidence
of
an
effort
to
suppress
the
votes
of
Trump
supporters.

Here’s
RNC
Chair
Michael
Whatley,
along
with
Val
Biancaniello,
a
PA
GOP
official
in
Delaware
County
who

got
herself
arrested

for
harassing
voters
in
line
to
cast
absentee
ballots
on
Monday.

https://x.com/ChairmanWhatley/status/1851393618365362352

In
2020,
President
Biden
took
63
percent
of
the
vote
in
Delaware
County,
and
52
percent
in
Bucks
County.
Nevertheless,
Whatley

tweeted

that
Biancaniello’s
arrest
“follows
reports
from
across
the
commonwealth
that
voters
are
being
turned
away
in
conservative
areas.”

The
RNC
and
the
Trump
campaign
characterized
attempts
to
manage
the
line
of
voters
as
“voter
suppression,”
and
they
filed

suit

in
the
Bucks
County
Court
of
Common
Pleas
alleging
that
officials
had
violated
the
law
by
not
allowing
everyone
in
line
by
5
to
cast
their
vote
on
site
that
day.
The

statute
,
and
indeed
the
complaint
itself,
are
a
little
unclear
as
to
whether
voters
have
the
right
to
vote
absentee
in
person,
or
simply
to
request
the
ballot
by
the
deadline.
But
the
petitioners
got
their
wish,
with
Judge
Jeffrey
Trauger
granting
a

preliminary
injunction

ordering
election
officials
to
continue
to
process
and
accept
absentee
ballot
requests
through
November
1.

Because
sending
out
absentee
ballots
requests
to
all
voters,
accepting
ballots
in
the
park,
ballot
drop
boxes,
and
court-mandated
voting
modifications
during
a
pandemic
are
illegal.
But
having
a
court
order
two
more
days
of
early
voting
is
totally
kosher.
And
Trump
will
explain
that
fine
distinction
to
Joe
Rogan
when
he
runs
again
in
2028.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.

Trump Campaign Cries Voter Suppression, Scores Win For… Ballot Access? – Above the Law

A
week
ago,
Trump

explained

to
podcaster
Joe
Rogan
that
the
2020
election
was
stolen
because
courts
improperly
expanded
access
to
the
ballot.

“They
were
supposed
to
get
legislative
approval
to
do
the
things
they
did,
and
they
didn’t
get
it
in
many
cases,
They
didn’t
get
it,”
the
former
president
rambled.
“Like
for
extensions
of
the
voting,
for
voting
earlier.
All
these.
different
things,
By
law,
they
had
to
get
legislative
approvals.
You
don’t
have
to
go
any
further
than
that.”

Naturally,
Trump
didn’t
invoke
the
words
“independent
state
legislature
theory”

too
many
syllables,
and
he
likely
doesn’t
even
understand
what
it
is.
But
his
point
was
pretty
much
the
definition
of
the
ISL,
which
has
taken
hold
in
the
GOP
since
their
fraud
claims
fizzled
out.
They
insist
that
court
orders
and
actions
taken
by
election
officials
to
expand
access
to
the
ballot
violate
the
Constitution’s
Elections
Clause,
which
provides
that
“The
Times,
Places
and
Manner
of
holding
Elections
for
Senators
and
Representatives,
shall
be
prescribed
in
each
State
by
the
Legislature
thereof;
but
the
Congress
may
at
any
time
by
Law
make
or
alter
such
Regulations,
except
as
to
the
Places
of
chusing
Senators.”

ISL
has
its
roots
in

Bush
v.
Gore
,
in
which
the
Rehnquist
Court
opined
that
each
state
legislature’s
authority
was
“plenary,”
and
it
could
even
cancel
elections
and
simply
award
electoral
votes
as
it
saw
fit.
A
few
Republican
politicians,
such
as
Maryland’s
Rep.
Andy
Harris,
are
now
openly
advocating
for
state
legislatures
to
do
just
that
this
cycle.
But
most
have
retreated
to

mumbling

like
House
Majority
Leader
Steve
Scalise
that
“There
were
a
few
states
that
did
not
follow
their
state
laws.
That’s
really
the
dispute
that
you’ve
seen
continue
on.”

And
yet
the
RNC
has
zero
problem
running
to
the
courts
to
get
them
to
change
the
rules
set
out
by
the
legislature
when
it’s
their
voters
(maybe!)
getting
the
short
end
of
the
stick.

The
issue
arose
in
Bucks
County,
where
there
were
long
lines
on
the
last
day
to
register
and
vote
absentee.

The
state
does
not
permit
in-person
early
voting,
but
it
does

allow

voters
to
fill
out
an
absentee
ballot
in
person
and
return
it
immediately.
That
process
requires
several
minutes
of
interface
with
election
clerks
for
every
ballot,
though,
and
takes
substantially
longer
than
simply
walking
in
and
voting
on
a
machine.
It
should
be
noted
that
this
logjam
was
virtually
guaranteed
by
Republican
state
legislators,
who
refuse
to
make
it
easier
to
cast
a
ballot
in
the
Commonwealth;
and
by
Republicans,
who
fearmonger
about
drop
boxes
so
aggressively
that
their
own
voters
are
terrified
to
use
them.

By

statute
,
the
last
day
to
request
an
absentee
ballot
is
seven
days
before
the
election,
i.e.
Tuesday
October
29.
According
to
the


Philadelphia
Inquirer
,
election
officials
in
Bucks
County
told
voters
who
were
in
line
by
2:30
on
Tuesday
that
they
could
fill
out
the
forms
and
cast
their
absentee
ballots
that
day.
Everyone
who
was
in
line
by
5
could
request
a
ballot
and
either
receive
it
by
mail
or
pick
it
up
later
in
the
week.
But
that
didn’t
stop
Republicans
from
claiming
that
the
long
lines
were
evidence
of
an
effort
to
suppress
the
votes
of
Trump
supporters.

Here’s
RNC
Chair
Michael
Whatley,
along
with
Val
Biancaniello,
a
PA
GOP
official
in
Delaware
County
who

got
herself
arrested

for
harassing
voters
in
line
to
cast
absentee
ballots
on
Monday.

https://x.com/ChairmanWhatley/status/1851393618365362352

In
2020,
President
Biden
took
63
percent
of
the
vote
in
Delaware
County,
and
52
percent
in
Bucks
County.
Nevertheless,
Whatley

tweeted

that
Biancaniello’s
arrest
“follows
reports
from
across
the
commonwealth
that
voters
are
being
turned
away
in
conservative
areas.”

The
RNC
and
the
Trump
campaign
characterized
attempts
to
manage
the
line
of
voters
as
“voter
suppression,”
and
they
filed

suit

in
the
Bucks
County
Court
of
Common
Pleas
alleging
that
officials
had
violated
the
law
by
not
allowing
everyone
in
line
by
5
to
cast
their
vote
on
site
that
day.
The

statute
,
and
indeed
the
complaint
itself,
are
a
little
unclear
as
to
whether
voters
have
the
right
to
vote
absentee
in
person,
or
simply
to
request
the
ballot
by
the
deadline.
But
the
petitioners
got
their
wish,
with
Judge
Jeffrey
Trauger
granting
a

preliminary
injunction

ordering
election
officials
to
continue
to
process
and
accept
absentee
ballot
requests
through
November
1.

Because
sending
out
absentee
ballots
requests
to
all
voters,
accepting
ballots
in
the
park,
ballot
drop
boxes,
and
court-mandated
voting
modifications
during
a
pandemic
are
illegal.
But
having
a
court
order
two
more
days
of
early
voting
is
totally
kosher.
And
Trump
will
explain
that
fine
distinction
to
Joe
Rogan
when
he
runs
again
in
2028.





Liz
Dye
 lives
in
Baltimore
where
she
produces
the
Law
and
Chaos substack and podcast.