was alleged that there were instances where there had been undue influence and bribery of the electorate through the distribution of “freebies.” This, it was argued, resulted in an unfair advantage to Mr. Mnangagwa and worked to Mr. Chamisa’s disadvantage. The Constitutional Court ruled that the allegations made by Mr. Chamisa in relation to voters in the rural areas and the role of traditional leaders were unfortunate. It held that: In an effort to show that the harmonised elections were not free, fair and credible, the applicant rehashed the allegation which has had pride of place in previous applications challenging the validity of elections in the country. The essence of the allegation is that voters in the rural areas vote for food aid or grain they receive from Government. If they are not voting for food aid, they are voting under the undue influence of traditional leaders who allegedly ensure that they vote for ZANU-PF. Rural voters are not respected as independent human beings capable of rationalising about the use of the vote to protect and advance their own social, economic and political interests. Whether living in rural or urban areas, Zimbabweans are educated people who are capable of understanding the meaning and use of the right to vote… The influence traditional leaders were alleged to have exerted on voters in rural areas to vote for the first respondent is not borne out by the facts. The allegation of involvement of traditional leaders was not linked to any other relevant information.73 73 20 At pp 110 and 111. The court avoided ruling on whether the traditional leaders had acted in the manner alleged and whether this would be constitutional and lawful. The court seemed defensive to the traditional leaders. THE COURT SEEMED DEFENSIVE TO THE TRADITIONAL LEADERS