SPIRITED efforts by former NetOne chief executive officer Reward Kangai (pictured) to get his severance package have been further delayed after the High Court dismissed his application in which he sought constitutional relief in his long-running labour dispute with the company.
Kangai sued Labour minister Paul Mavima and NetOne Cellular, stating that section 93 (5a) and section 93 (5b) of the Labour Act be declared unconstitutional because they were in[1]consistent with other sections of the constitution.
He complained that continuous delays in re[1]leasing his package was prejudicial, considering the country’s ever-changing economic policies and inflation.
But Justice Joseph Mafusire threw out his application, saying it was not clear what he want[1]ed. The judge also said he failed to approach the courts when need arose and it was fatal for him to do so now.
“A court order must be complete in itself. The nature and extent of the relief granted must be self-evident on the face of it. It should not require an interpretive process or a reference to pleadings,” said the judge.
In his application, Kangai traced the history of his employment, dating back to the then Posts and Telecommunications Corporation and through its unbundling stage until he end[1]ed at the helm of NetOne.
Kangai said there were several processes and efforts undertaken since 2016 to sever the employment relationship.
Effectively, Kangai and NetOne have been locked in legal combat at different judicial fora since 2016. He challenged the termination of his employment.
The Labour minister upheld the termination of Kangai’s employment, but directed NetOne to pay him some money in line with terms and conditions of his employment. In terms of the law, once this is done the Labour minister is expected to apply to the Labour Court for confirmation.
The then minister said she failed to do so because she was overwhelmed by her new employment, trying to familiarise with a new working environment.
NetOne also opposed the application for condonation. The application was set down for hearing by the Labour Court on 10 September 2020. During proceedings, NetOne said only the Labour officer could make the application. Faced with that predicament, the minister withdrew her application. That is why his employment termination has not been confirmed to date.
Kangai said despite writing several letters to the senior labour relations officer asking that a replacement officer be appointed to proceed with the confirmation, nothing has been done. He argued that he is being seriously prejudiced about his inability to execute the judgement of the Labour minister. He also cited as an example changes in the currency situation in Zimbabwe.
He said a multi-currency system existed when the ruling was made. He also complained about NetOne causing his eviction from a house he was using, among other issues, yet his contract termination has not been confirmed.
In his application, Kangai said he was asserting his right to enforce fundamental human freedoms. He argued he had been denied equal protection and the benefit of the law.
“This is discriminatory and unconscionable,” Kangai said.
Justice Mafusire said Kangai was however aware of remedies available in his case and should have approached the courts when his several letters to the Labour officers were ignored.
“Having gone nowhere on that front he could have approached the court for relief. His deci[1]sion to launch this constitutional application is therefore strange. ” . . . for these reasons, the applicant’s contitutional application is ill-conceived. There is no constitutional matter before the court. Thus both the constitutional relief and the con[1]sequential substantive remedy sought by the applicant cannot succeed. The application is hereby dismissed with costs,” ruled the judge. — STAFF WRITER
