AFM leaders should go separate ways peacefully

EDITOR — Please allow me space in your widely read broadsheet to air my concerns about developments in the Apostolic Faith Mission in Zimbabwe (AFM). The AFM is a non-governmental organisation registered as a church organisation with a constitution which clarifies its governance system both administratively and leadership structure and system.

The governance system as provided for by the constitution allows assemblies, provinces, the national and departments to open bank accounts. It is under those same accounts that the church, through any of the above mentioned, shall deposit their funds. New church accounts

There is nowhere in the existing AFM constitution where it is stated that when a misunderstanding or leadership dispute arises parallel structures or anyone is permitted to open parallel accounts using the same assembly or department’s name. It’s illegal, criminal, fraudulent and a pure misrepresentation. Leadership

There is provision at law where the incumbent president of an organisation or nation ceases to execute his mandate simply because his legitimacy or legality is being challenged either from within or without.

A good example is the case involving Advocate Nelson Chamisa against President Mnangagwa. The fact that Adv Chamisa was and is still challenging the presidency does not stop President Mnangagwa from executing his mandate as the head of the Second Republic.

The incumbent remains the president and the fact that someone is challenging him or her, be it from internally or externally, does not make the challenger a legitimate successor. The challenger remains, at best, only an aspirant.

Another example abound, the removal of former president Robert Mugabe from office through Operation Restore Legacy of November 2017. President Mnangagwa did not just wake up on the throne. Certain legal processes had to be followed, even though it was clear that ED would succeed RGM. It was after the exhaustion of legal channels that parachuted ED to the throne.

A vote of no confidence is the longest process of removing somebody from authority and does not end in itself. It follows constitutional and legal administrative and execution procedures until its final endorsement. Anyone who claims the presidency without properly following all constitutional and legal administration of processes becomes not only dreaming and hallucinating, but would have taken an illegal route. Leadership take-over

Anyone or any leadership who becomes the legal and authorised structure takes over control of everything — that is the organisation name, emblem, assets and bank accounts. The very fact that the separatists or rebels rising against the current leadership of Dr Aspher Madziyire have pending cases at courts over control of the AFM church means the current administrative structure and governance is the legal controller of the aforementioned. Anyone who does or fund any activity that is not in sync with those still in administrative control of the church will be committing a crime. Constitution

The amendment of the constitution does not mean formation of a new church, organisation or country, as claimed by our erstwhile brothers in the AFM. It’s practically impossible. The amendment of the AFM constitution is just an adjustment to its operational systems. Many examples abound. Zimbabwe amended its constitution a record 19 times until a decision was made to make a new draft that was adopted, resulting in its operationalisation in 2013.

That did not change Zimbabwe into a new country. It also did not create a power vacuum necessitating take-over of leadership. What we have is the old Zimbabwe with a new constitution and new way of doing things. If one claims that he is living in the Zimbabwe of the old constitution, it is as good as subversion. The old constitution and the new constitution are and remains the property of Government of Zimbabwe, and the same applies to the AFM church. Legality challenge

No one is against the election of a new leadership in the AFM. Dr Madziyire’s successor can be, but not limited to the current deputy Rev Cosum Chiangwa.

Rev Chiangwa’s biggest challenge is the system of leadership take-over he wants to use to catapult himself to the church presidency. The ill advised coup d’état, of September 22 comes to mind. What is a coup? It is the sudden, violent overthrow of an existing legitimate governance structure by a small group. The coup d’état route he has taken with the aid of factionalists that are certain to dump him in the near future, has never been seen or done in the more than 100 years history of this Pentecostal denomination’s existence.

His expediency even though he might be competent is now questionable. Why resorting to the chameleon style of changing colours, goal-posts and back-stabbing a leader that he should be advising.

Moreso his legality and legitimacy becomes compromised as much as he criticises the legitimacy of Dr Madziyire over extension of term of office, for which he (Rev Chiangwa) was also beneficiary. Why didn’t he resign in protest as the AFM deputy president? He should also respect the constitutionality and legal procedures before his ascendancy to the church presidency. Why didn’t wait for the December elections? Was he not supposed to mobilise his structures and supporters and fight from within?

All the irregularities of the current leadership do not make Dr Madziyire illegitimate and Rev Chiangwa legitimate. It only brings controversy around Dr Madziyire’s legitimacy, but he remains legal president of the AFM in Zim.

This, coupled with the coup, also does not make Rev Chiangwa the legitimate AFM president. Concerned AFM member