==> Kenderjian v Chief Immigration officer 2000 (1) ZLR 697 (s)

Mr L T Biti for the applicant – matter in the supreme court a constitutional application on s22 right to reside in zimbabwe.

 

• The applicant was a citizen of Zimbabwe. She had married a lebanese man. Before coming to Zimbabwe, he had been convicted of murder in lebanon and served a term of imprisonment before being released under an amnesty. He failed to declare this conviction on arrival in Zimbabwe. After his arrival he met and married the applicant; the immigration authorities on discovering his conviction, declared him a prohibited person and sought to have him removed. the applicant brought a constitutional application, arguing that her constitutional right to freedom of movement and residence would be impaired.
• held, that the interference with h applicants constitutional rights could be justified only on the grounds of public safety or public order. the removal of the applicants husband was manifestly aimed at ensuring the interests of the public safety and the public order in Zimbabwe. The interfere4nce was in line with he legitimate aims authored by the constitution
• held, further that in deciding whether the applicant had shown that such interference was not reasonably justified in a democratic society , the court had to weigh up the public interest in the removal of a person was, because of his past criminal record, was justifiably seen as a threat to the safety of persons and property against the certain disruption to the life of the applicant, who had to choose between going to a foreign country or remaining here without her husband. The balance was not tilted in favour of the applicant: her husband had committed a most abhorrent murder— one which if committed in Zimbabwe , would have attracted the death penalty — and had lied about it when he entered the countr. the state was within its rightist remove prohibited persons and that right could only be restricted in well-defined cases- the was not such a case.