Section 175: Powers of courts in constitutional matters
Constitution of Zimbabwe
(1) Where a court makes an order concerning the constitutional invalidity of any law or any conduct of the President or Parliament, the order has no force unless it is confirmed by the Constitutional Court.
(2) A court which makes an order of constitutional invalidity referred to in subsection (1) may grant a temporary interdict or other temporary relief to a party, or may adjourn the proceedings, pending a decision of the Constitutional Court on the validity of the law or conduct concerned.
(3) Any person with a sufficient interest may appeal, or apply, directly to the Constitutional Court to confirm or vary an order concerning constitutional validity by a court in terms of subsection (1).
(4) If a constitutional matter arises in any proceedings before a court, the person presiding over that court may and, if so requested by any party to the proceedings, must refer the matter to the Constitutional Court unless he or she considers the request is merely frivolous or vexatious.
(5) An Act of Parliament or rules of court must provide for the reference to the Constitutional Court of an order concerning constitutional invalidity made in terms of subsection (1) by a court other than the Constitutional Court.
(6) When deciding a constitutional matter within its jurisdiction a court may—
(a) declare that any law or conduct that is inconsistent with the Constitution is invalid to
the extent of the inconsistency;
(b) make any order that is just and equitable, including an order limiting the retrospective
effect of the declaration of invalidity and an order suspending conditionally or
unconditionally the declaration of invalidity for any period to allow the competent
authority to correct the defect.
Key Insight: This section establishes a system of judicial review where the Constitutional Court has the final say on constitutional matters. While lower courts can make initial determinations about constitutional validity, these decisions require confirmation by the Constitutional Court to take effect. This creates a balanced approach that allows constitutional issues to be raised at various levels of the judiciary while maintaining consistency through centralized final authority.