No constitution, no claim: High Court blocks church faction’s property grab

CHINHOYI – The High Court of Zimbabwe has dismissed an application by a faction of the True Apostolic Mission of the Whole World Church seeking to bar another faction from using the church’s name, logo, uniforms, and properties.

The applicants Elias Kanoti, Andrew Choruwa, Titus Chinhema and Doesmatter Makumbirofa went up against the True Apostolic Mission of the Whole World Church.

Justice Catherine Kate Bachi Mzawazi ruled that the applicants failed to provide enough evidence to prove their claim as the rightful leaders of the church.

The judge noted that the applicants did not present their church’s constitution and failed to demonstrate how the respondents had breached its terms.

The two groups have been in a long-standing dispute over the leadership of the church and ownership of its assets. The applicants argued that they are the legitimate church established in 1960 and that the respondents are a breakaway faction.

The respondents, on the other hand, claim to be members of the original church and deny any secession.

Justice Mzawazi pointed out that both parties rely on the same founding year (1960) for the church, but neither presented the constitution as proof of their claims.

He highlighted the importance of a church constitution as a governing document outlining the rights and obligations of members.

The judge further noted that the applicants did not address the question of how the respondents supposedly left the church, whether through expulsion, resignation, or secession.

He emphasized the need for witness testimonies in a proper trial setting to determine these crucial facts.

While the applicants cited previous court cases regarding church property disputes, Justice Bachi-Mzawazi distinguished those cases by pointing out that they involved situations where members had clearly left or been expelled from the church.

In this case, the judge ruled that the matter of who has the right to lead the church needs to be settled before any decisions can be made regarding ownership of property and religious symbols.

The application was dismissed with costs awarded to the respondents.

“Resultantly, the court is of the opinion that there are indeed material disputes of facts warranting oral evidence. Secondly, that since there seem to be no matter pending before any competent court, on the issues related to who should assume the mantle of the applicant to enable the resolution of that material conflict of fact, the matter at hand cannot stand.

“As it is, it does not seem as applicants have a clear right. There is an alternative remedy to approach courts and resolve the issues observed herein. As such there is no irreparable harm to talk about and the balance of convenience favours the dismissal of the application with costs. See, Masimba Charity Huni Fuels (Pvt) Ltd v Nathan Amos Kadurira & Anor SC 39/22. Punitive costs have not been justified.

“Accordingly, the application is dismissed with costs,” the judge ruled.

The judgement paves the way for a full trial where both parties can present evidence to substantiate their claims to leadership of the True Apostolic Mission of the Whole World Church.