Jessie Majome Was Reassigned Before: Presidential Spokesperson Refutes Allegations Over Move From ZHRC
Zimbabwe’s Presidential spokesperson, George Charamba, has refuted allegations by lawyers and legal commentators about the reassignment of Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) chairperson Jessie Majome, insisting that she had previously been reassigned and that critics were selectively interpreting the Constitution.
The debate intensified between 10 and 11 April 2026 after Majome’s reassignment triggered legal and political reactions.
While government officials defended the move, several lawyers and commentators questioned whether the reassignment complied with constitutional provisions governing independent commissions.
“This Is Not The First Time She Has Been Reassigned”
Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) spokesperson Simiso Mlevu weighed in on 11 April 2026, arguing that the reassignment was not unprecedented.
She wrote:
“By the way, this is not the first time she has been re-assigned. In March 2024, she was re-assigned to ZHRC from ZACC. The PG, too, was re-assigned. The inconsistent application of moral anger and interpretation of the law by ‘pundits’ betrays the intentions.”
Mlevu further questioned why legal experts were raising concerns now:
“Why are legal minds selective in questioning issues? Where were they and what did they do when she and others were re-assigned before?”
She also addressed constitutional arguments:
“The argument advanced is that she could only be re-assigned in terms of Section 237, read with Section 187 (which the appointing authority doesn’t think applies). It should follow that, with or without CAB3, legal minds should defend the LAW and not their interests.”
Responding in vernacular, she added:
“Ngithi bathuleleni ngesikhathi esuswa eZACC esiya eZHRC? Babengakwazi ukuthi umthetho uthini, na?”
(Why were they quiet when she was moved from ZACC to ZHRC? Did they not know what the law says?)
Mlevu also responded to critics questioning her objectivity:
“My paycheck isn’t tied to social media discussions. My position is tied to my conviction.”
Presidential Spokesperson Defends Reassignment
George Charamba also defended the reassignment in posts dated 10 April 2026.
He wrote:
“The way our Constitutional Commissions are constituted and ran is such that any deliberation, decision or pronouncement related to a Commission is the outcome of the whole Commission, never of any one Commissioner, however placed organisationally.”
He added:
“To suggest a Commission report is the mind of any one Commissioner impugns both the Commission and the Commissioner to whom the report is imputed.”
Charamba also criticised what he described as inconsistent reactions:
“I distinctly remember that when Madame Majome was appointed Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission, those in opposition circles accused her of being a turncoat. Today her reassignment from a position to which her appointment was dubbed a betrayal, is cause for hue and cry!”
He further challenged critics:
“Go to court; invent locus standi and we meet you there.”
Lawyers Raise Constitutional Concerns
However, several lawyers and legal commentators raised concerns about the legality of the reassignment. These comments represent some of the reactions and are not exhaustive.
Advocate Thabani Mpofu said:
“A member of an Independent Commission, such as the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission, can only be removed from office under Section 237(2) of the Constitution… accordingly, a tribunal must be appointed on the recommendation of the Judicial Service Commission.”
He added:
“Reassigning Jessie Majome to the Public Service Commission therefore constitutes removal from office and is unconstitutional.”
Lawyer Siphosami Malunga also weighed in:
“There’s nothing in the constitution about reassigning commissioners… the process to remove her from ZHRC is ultra vires the Constitution so the removal is invalid, void and unenforceable.”
Legal practitioner Obey Shava also questioned the move, stating:
“The President did not follow due process. The same procedure used for the removal of judges from office is applicable to members of an independent Commission. This ‘re assignment’ is not based on any constitutional provision. It is ipso jure, illegal. Constitutional abomination!”
Meanwhile, lawyer Doug Coltart asked:
“Were the legal requirements for the removal of a member of an Independent Commission complied with by the President? What are the President’s grounds for removing her?”
These comments came after the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission released a report related to Constitutional Amendment No. 3 consultations, which some deemed critical of the process.
The post Jessie Majome Was Reassigned Before: Presidential Spokesperson Hits Back At Lawyers Over ZHRC Move appeared first on iHarare News.
