THE High Court has nullified last month's Parliamentary motion seeking to dismiss Clerk of Parliament Mr Austin Zvoma for failing to respect legislators, on the grounds that Parliament failed to follow correct proce­dures. According to last month's resolution, a five-member committee was to be set up to deter­mine Mr Zvoma's fate.

The court found that such a committee could not judge Mr Zvoma, but only impose a penalty should he be found guilty of an offence.

The judgment was given in Justice Francis Bere's chambers.

Lawyers from both sides confirmed that the judge had granted the order sought by Mr Zvoma and they praised the judge for passing a "well-reasoned" judgment.

The judgment dealt with the procedures followed, not with the substance of the charges by some in Parliament against Mr Zvoma.

Generally, the courts do not interfere with Parliamentary decisions, but on the rules that are followed to reach those decisions.

The lawyers said the court found that the motion was punitive in nature and that the committee to be established would not deter­mine the guilt or otherwise, but only the penalty.

It was the court's finding that the proce­dure adopted was wrong and that the Stand­ing Rules and Orders Committee alone was qualified to initiate disciplinary proceedings against Mr Zvoma.

Mr Zvoma's lawyer, Mr Edwin Manikai of Dube, Manikai and Hwacha, said the judg­ment stopped Parliament from interfering with the process pending the resolution of a court application filed by Mr Zvoma.

Mr Zvoma filed an application seeking to declare the whole process of firing him ille­gal, but after that was done, Parliament moved the motion setting up the new com­mittee, so Mr Zvoma filed the urgent cham­ber application granted yesterday to halt that process.

"The judgment means Parliament is restrained from interfering with the process pending hearing of the application seeking the main relief to declare the whole process illegal.

"The judge found that the process should have been initiated by the Standing Rules and Orders Committee and Mr Zvoma is entitled to a fair hearing.

"The Standing Rules and Orders Commit­tee or its sub-committees is the one that rec­ommends disciplinary action on the clerk. The matter is back to the drawing board.

"The ruling ensures that there is no cloud­ing or interference with Parliament, an important arm of the State.

"That was a well-reasoned judgment," Mr Manikai said.

Mr Chris Mhike of Artherstone and Cook, who represented the respondents, said the judgment was clear and that Parliament has to comply and map the way forward in light of the judgment.

Mr Zvoma had sued House of Assembly Speaker Mr Lovemore Moyo, his deputy Nomalanga Khumalo, Senate President Cde Edna Madzongwe and four Parliamentarians.

They were all represented by Mr Mhike.

"We have noted the contents of the judg­ment. It was a very substantiated judgment, exposing a number of fundamental points of law.

"Parliament naturally has to consider these pronouncements with the seriousness they deserve.

"After proper consideration of the issues raised by the judge, a position will then be taken by Parliament on how to proceed in light of the latest judgment," he said.

The attempt to fire Mr Zvoma started early last month with MDC-T legislators accusing the clerk of failing to adhere to universally accepted etiquette and decorum of officials in his capacity.

Some of the allegations included failure to properly conduct the election for the post of Speaker of the House of Assembly in August 2008 and unprocedurally deferring the sitting of Parliament on March 27 last year.

Mr Zvoma's lawyers were moving for the nullification of the motion on the basis that the path used by the legislators was illegal and that the legislators went on to debate the motion despite a pending court.

But, the legislators argued that the motion had already been adopted and that only the House of Assembly could reverse it.