…as Ndlovu Withdraws From Case

A fierce legal dispute is emerging between lawyers Nqobani Sithole, Method Ndlovu, and Zibusiso Ncube over the controversial Matabeleland pressure group Ibhetshu LikaZulu and its leader Mbuso Fuzwayo’s Constitutional Court application seeking to block President Emmerson Mnangagwa from extending his term of office to 2030.

The legal challenge itself remains real and continues to carry significant constitutional and political implications. However, the situation has been complicated by Ndlovu’s abrupt withdrawal from the case yesterday under circumstances that have raised serious questions about the sincerity of his stated reasons.

Ndlovu announced that he was stepping down from the matter citing a breakdown of trust with clients, lack of payment for his legal services, and concerns about protecting his professional integrity and reputation. Yet observers note that these explanations appear contradictory. Claiming simultaneously that he is leaving because of unpaid fees, a collapse of mutual trust, and reputational risk has led some insiders to question whether these reasons are being advanced to mask deeper concerns about the direction of the litigation.

Sources close to the matter say tensions between Sithole and Ndlovu had been escalating behind the scenes, particularly following controversy involving former cabinet minister Jonathan Moyo. Ndluvu suggested that Moyo was the “principal architect” behind the litigation, a claim that sparked disputes among those associated with the case.

According to insiders, Sithole had already begun taking steps to remove Ndlovu from the matter after the controversy intensified. Ndlovu is said to have pre-empted that move by quickly issuing a letter announcing his withdrawal. The letter was subsequently leaked to the media, reportedly angering Sithole and further deepening divisions among the lawyers.

While Ndlovu’s public explanation focuses on fees and trust issues, some sources believe the withdrawal reflects anxiety about the likely outcome of the case. With the Constitutional Court challenge facing intense scrutiny and competing legal interpretations, there is growing speculation that Ndlovu may have stepped aside because he feared a possible defeat in court.

The application itself stems from a ZANU-PF conference resolution adopted in Mutare in October 2025 calling for constitutional changes that would allow Mnangagwa to remain in office until 2030, even though his current constitutional two-term limit ends in 2028. Fuzwayo and Ibhetshu LikaZulu subsequently filed the Constitutional Court challenge seeking to block any such extension.

However, the case has also been clouded by claims from critics that it may have been structured as a strategic or collusive legal action linked to broader political maneuvering. Those allegations have further complicated an already volatile situation.

Ndlovu’s withdrawal has now left the high-profile application in uncertainty, with the applicants temporarily lacking legal representation. At the same time, the fallout between Sithole, Ndlovu, and Ncube threatens to escalate into a professional dispute that could ultimately be referred to the Law Society of Zimbabwe.

As the conflict between the lawyers intensifies, the legal battle over Mnangagwa’s proposed term extension is likely to continue — even as the circumstances surrounding Ndlovu’s departure raise new questions about the motivations behind it