Luveve MP in divorce court
LUVEVE Member of Parliament Ntandoyenkosi Mlilo (Zanu-PF) is seeking the dissolution of his marriage to his wife of 11 years for allegedly denying him conjugal rights for more than 12 months.
The legislator and his wife, Miriam Mlilo (nee Nerwande) wedded on April 29, 2005 under Chapter 5:11 of the Marriages Act.
The couple has been on separation since 2013.
The MP wants to be granted custody of their three children aged between five and 16 years and said his wife can get all the movable household property.
Mlilo, through his lawyers Legal Resources Foundation, yesterday filed an application for a decree of divorce at the Bulawayo High Court citing irreconcilable differences with his wife.
In papers before the court, the MP said his marriage had irretrievably broken down such that there were no prospects of restoring it.
“I legally married the defendant (Miriam) in terms of the Marriages Act (5:11) in Bulawayo on April 29, 2005 and the marriage still subsists.
‘‘However, the marriage relationship between the parties has irretrievably broken down to such an extent that there are no reasonable prospects of restoration,” said Mlilo.
He said they have not shared conjugal rights for the past 12 months.
“The parties have not shared conjugal rights for a period in excess of 12 months and as a result I have lost love and affection for the defendant and do not wish to remain married to her,” he stated in his summons.
“It would be in the best interests of the minor children if the court orders that I be granted their custody with the defendant being granted the right to access for only two weeks during every school holiday.”
Mlilo said he did not require his wife to contribute in maintenance fees towards the upkeep and welfare of the children.
During the subsistence of the marriage, the couple acquired household property.
“The household property is in possession of the defendant.
‘‘It would be just and equitable that upon this honourable court granting decree of divorce, all the movable household property should be exclusively be awarded to the defendant,” said Mlilo. —@mashnets.