Tuesday, March 19, 2024

Breaking own Rules, illegally abrogating the Constitution: Constitutional Court Circus 2016?

Share

GREEN Party Presidential Candidate Peter Sinkamba
GREEN Party Presidential Candidate Peter Sinkamba

Lest I am cited for contempt, let me make it very clear from the outset that I am speaking from the bottom of my heart as a citizen bound by the rights and duty imposed on me by Article 2 of the Constitution. I am bound by Article 2 to defend the Constitution and resist or prevent a person from overthrowing, suspending or illegally abrogating the Constitution.

On Friday, the full bench of the Constitutional Court made a ruling to the effect that the petition before it can only be heard within fourteen days according to the provisions of Article 101 (5) of the Constitution which time frame was coming to close at 23.59 hours. The same day, the Court had changed it decision by extending the hearing of the petition by another 4 days, up to Thursday next week. By so doing, the Constitutional Court breached Order XV Rule 7 of the Constitutional Court Rules Act 2016.

Is it illegal for the Constitutional Court to overturn its earlier decision or break its own rules? Not at all. Whilst the general rule is that the decision by the Supreme or Constitutional Court is final, however, a departure from this principle can be justified only when circumstances of a substantial and compelling character makes it necessary to do so in order for the Court to make sure that there is no miscarriage of justice in a particular case.

The court is bound to provide justice to the extent it is within the human procedure of the administration of justice; the wrong must be checked and corrected. In the interest of justice, if it means changing the rules of procedure, save provisions of the Constitution, the Court is duty-bound to strike out any written law, customary law and customary practice inconsistent with provisions of the spirit of Constitution to the extent of the inconsistency.

Whilst the Constitutional Court can break its own i.e. Order XV Rule 7 of the Constitutional Court Rules Act 2016, it appears to me that the decision by the Constitutional Court to extend the sittings to Thursday next week is clearly unconstitutional. It is in breach of Articles 1, 101 and 269 of the Constitution. The decision by the Constitutional Court to suspend or illegally abrogate Articles 1, 101 and 269 of the Constitution sets an utterly wrong precedence.

Whilst justice is said to be above all, however, it is not above the Constitution. Per Article 1(4) of the Constitution, the validity or legality of any provision of the Constitution is not subject to any challenge by or before a State organ or other forum however unjust the provision is. Article 1(3) binds all persons in Zambia, including State organs and State institutions, (Constitutional Court inclusive), comply with all provisions of the Constitution. Furthermore, it is for this reason that by Article 1(2), any act or omission by any person that contravenes the Constitution is illegal.

If the Constitutional Court does not vacate this illegal position, then for the same principle, it is also justified that the decision to bar the petitioners amend their petition, and bring in more witnesses, be reversed too.

Amendment of the petition and bringing in more witnesses are circumstances of a substantial and compelling character necessary for the Court to make sure that there is no miscarriage of justice in this particular case. Furthermore, prior to commencement of the trial, it is imperative that the Constitutional Court pronounces itself on the question of whether or not the President-Elect should hand over power to the Speaker in view of Article 104(3) and Article 98 (1). Otherwise, the whole decision to illegally extend the petition hearing will in the long run be rendered a circus.

The Constitutional Court, being the highest forum and the apex court, has to be really careful about its decisions all the time to save its integrity and credibility.

99 COMMENTS

  1. A law must be seen to accomplish the purpose for which it was created. In this case, the Constitutional Court has set a good precedence, affording it enough time to carry-out the business at hand.

    • Who cares what you little heart thinks.

      UPND are being bullied by a shamble of a group of persons in these judges that are working and colluding with Lungu and his squadrons.

      They are dysfunctional untrustworthy and are clearly stealing a living with no respect to their profession.

      No credibility whatsoever and are being questioned by everyone pretty much.

      All in all its shambles.

      UPND are collectively better than UPND if this was held in a boxing ring lungu would have been stopped. Unfortunately uts gone to a decision and judges and they are as corrupt as anything.

      Thanks

      BB2014

    • Unless this Court is willing to do (if by any means they are allowed to this) what the Supreme Court of the United States of America did in the A. Gore vs G.W. Bush 2000 election recount in Florida. That is, after making a somewhat controversial ruling, the US Supreme Court “categorically” stated that their ruling/decision in that Case only applied to that particular Case and NEVER be used as precedence setting. Or something to that effect. Legal minds can look this Case up and see if this is correct. But I clearly remember the Legal chatter surrounding that Case.

      The Zambian Constitutional Court can similarly play gimmicks with the Constitution if at all possible. Otherwise we are in trouble if this decision to extend the Constitutionally mandated time limit of 14 days sets…

    • continue…

      … precedence for future Cases. For what will stop both litigants and Judges in Lower Courts to follow, henceforth, the Constitutional Court’s lead if this decision is allowed to stand?

      That’s the kind of PERILOUS PATH the Constitutional Court is potentially setting our Judicial System and Country on. If this decision stands, anyone can now stand before the Court, give a PERSUASIVE POLITICAL SPEECH to the Bench, spice it up with Precedent set in this Case, and Judges in both Upper and Lower Courts will be rendered powerless to stop abusive Legal gymnastics in their Courtrooms.

    • Lungu appointed these 5 monkeys to the bench. Lungu is busily pulling their strings. HH may not win his petition but he has proved what a useless bunch of illegal squatters the Kangaroo Court (KanCourt) is. Lungu’s Constitution is the most useless piece of legislation that the World has ever seen.

    • So what, you are a coward, you coincided defeat yet you know the election was not free and fair. Furthermore rigged.. leaders like you have no moral right to talk. shut up and let real men Like General MIYANDA TALK.. You bootleakers are a shame to Zambians. HH is the man he stood his grounds..

    • Article 125(3) The Supreme Court is bound by its decisions, EXCEPT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE and development of jurisprudence.
      118. (1) The judicial authority of the Republic derives from
      the people of Zambia and shall be exercised in a just manner and
      such exercise shall promote accountability.
      (2) In exercising judicial authority, the courts shall be guided
      by the following principles:
      (a) justice shall be done to all, without discrimination;
      (b) justice shall not be delayed;
      (c) adequate compensation shall be awarded, where payable;
      (d) alternative forms of dispute resolution, including traditional
      dispute resolution mechanisms, shall be promoted,
      subject to clause (3);
      (e) justice shall be administered without undue regard to
      procedural technicalities; and
      (f) the…

    • IS IT A MR FIX OR THE SAME AS THE ONE WE WORKED TO FIX
      ====================================
      It took 3years+ to deliver ruling on a Tonga Bull’s (Mazoka’s) 2001 presidential election results petition. The work that was expended in the run up to the contemporary constitution was meant to fixed (put limit to) the length of time given for the quick disposal of similar petitions. It seems to me that the amended constitution was biased to the emotions of the victim(herein called petitioner). The judge’s lenience towards the dual, HH and GBV-M supports this. Very little energy was used to comprehensively secure the teeth of the president-elect except for the incumbency factor. That said, we Zambians talk to much and work less. Did the President-elect also read the constitution as he once…

    • Contd’…
      …mocked Zambians on the G12 clause? Do Concourt lawyers understand this Constitution subject themselves? Is the Attorney General qualified for his job-or is he lip-tied on account that the case in court. I mean can we have a person with the real legal brains to explain in plain English what is supposed to happen in this situation;like George Kunda once helped the country once upon a time following the LPM demise. Can the Concourt lawyer clear the air on her decision or was she compromised in some way? To much street interpretation of the Conlaw here; Y’all shut your trumps up and let these dull lawyers deliberate. Dull because they act equally confused.

    • It was annie Mwewa in her wisdom who single handdely ruled that the petition be closed on friday.The constitution bench interpreted very well it 14 working days.Though the costitution is silent on this its common sence that courts do not work on sat and sunday.So their is no breach of the law,its only Mwewa who misdirected her self.

  2. Mr. Sinkamba,
    “…Lest I am cited for contempt, let me make it very clear from the outset that I am speaking from the bottom of my heart as a citizen bound by the rights and duty imposed on me by Article 2 of the Constitution. I am bound by Article 2 to defend the Constitution and resist or prevent a person from overthrowing, suspending or illegally abrogating the Constitution…”

    Can you also read Article 1(5); Article 5(1); Article 11(a); Article 18(9) and Article 127 of the Constitution of Zambia and then (always provided that you have understood), please read s.8(1)(a)(b)(h)(2)(3)(c)(4) and s. 9 of the Act No. 8 of 2016.

    Please take it easy with the consumption of medical weed, it has bad side effect on your brain as all medical research shows.

  3. It’s for the execution of justice that courts exist. The impediment of time restrictions on them is a distant luxury they can afford to do without.

    • “Justice DELAYED, is Justice DENIED!” Doesn’t this sound like a principle in Law/Justice that has everything to do with the IMPORTANCE OF TIME to you?

      There is, as well, the principle of STATUTE OF LIMITATION. A very cardinal principle in LAW which has everything to do with TIME LIMITS.

      So baba, TIME and TIME LIMITS are very, very, very, important in LAW and can be a MAJOR BASIS for a decision/ruling by a Court Judge. Plenty of Cases have been won and lost based on time limits alone. So time limits are and have always been part and parcel of Law and Justice all around the world, not just Zambia!

  4. The Same monkeys ruled that Minister’s stay in office when parliament was disbarred was null and void. Today the same Judges abrogated articles 1 if 101 of the constitution clearly indicates that there is no justice and consistency in our judicial system. They should not receive allowances from the Government for the four days adjusted because the constitution is clear 14 day are over. Let those days be paid by HH and GBM whom they have favored in that ruling.

    • These same 5 monkeys on a bench refused to work weekends and evenings during the 14 days. Now their masters insist that 14 days is 14 days and they have to comply. What a daft circus. Lungu deserves a medal for ultimate stoopidity in running a country. Lungu is systematically proving that Zambia is a sham, a charade, a dark hole in the middle of Africa, a failed state.

  5. There is too much freedom, independence and system protection in our judicial system. If a medical doctor or any other professional is found wanting it would have been a different story. Let’s find a system that will bring lawyers and judges to same level with other professions when it comes to discipline. Let the judgements for all offences be written and strictly be followed. If the judge goes out the police should arrest them. HE Edgar LUNGU we want judgements to be predictable not what someone dreams or feel

    • SO, WHAT WAS THESE SO CALLED CONCOURT CHAPS DOING WHOLE THIS TIME? YOU KNOW WE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM IN ZAMBIA WHERE LAWYERS THEMSELVES FIND IT IMPOSSIBLE TO FOLLOW THEIR OWN LAWS, LEGAL CHAPS THEMSELVES ARE SO IGNORANT ABOUT THE LAWS THEY FORMULATE BECAUSE GENERALLY THEY JUST DON’T EVEN READ IT, THEY JUST SIGN IT OFF. SO THEY HAVE EVER REMAINED SO IGNORANT ABOUT THE LAW AND THEY STILL CALL THEMSELVES LAW WHATEVER. CAN ZAMBIA START IMPORTING LEGAL SERVICE FROM MALAWI, PLEASE?

  6. It would have been reckless behavior for the Constitutional Court to preside over a miscarriage of justice and walk away from the operating room when its patient, already on the operating table, was in agony, crying for help, just because the time allotted to the operation had expired.

  7. Even within their diligent execution of law, courts are still bound by ethical standards. It would have been unethical, indeed unheard of, for the ConCourt to dispose of a case so deprived of legal representation. The Court had to do what it did. It had no better choice.

  8. Tomorrow PF lawyers will leave LUNGU and Inonge will the concourt extend the period again? The following day new layers for HH will abandon him . This is what we are avoiding. Will HH accept responsibility when the economy collapse or the country becomes unmanageable because of his delay in putting the govt in place? Its not about me but the will of God

    • So did you want the Court to make a ruling in favour of ECL without hearing the side HH? The economy is in shambles in case you did not know, that’s why we are going into bed with IMF again. Alexander Chikwanda knows this too well because he presided over the failed economy under UNIP and he is at it again.

  9. Is this man a PF cadre or an opposition leader ? I think something is wrong in our country, the culture of laziness in reading and understanding important issues.

    • @Zakeyo,

      “the culture of laziness in reading and understanding important issues”

      I think there are plenty (maybe too many!) people reading the Constitution. The REAL problem is the UNDERSTANDING of the language of the Court, English! To most Zambians English is a second language, and it follows that they are not fully conversant with the abominable intricacies of this convoluted and ambiguous tongue!

      The commonly accepted phrase, to “HEAR” a case within 14 days, in English just means that the Court must commence proceedings within that time. It categorically DOES NOT MEAN that they have to complete the case!

      If that was so, the law (Constitution) would have stated EXPLICITLY that the case must be heard AND DETERMINED within the 14 days. So take it from me, a native English…

  10. News circulating is that some ConCourt lawyers are in the pockets of the 2 rich petitioners. Can this be why they are finding it difficult to correctly handle thus case?

    • The problem we have in Zambia is if someone tries to follow the law he or she becomes your enemy. The Con Court judges’ extending of the time should be highly commended.

    • Which 2 petitioners are you talking about?

      Maybe you meant respondents?

      Like the one that has suddenly acquired TWO AND A HALF MILLION US DOLLARS in the short space of just more than a year. And his partners in crime?

  11. The spirit of the law was to dispose off presidential petitions as quickly as possible and not to hold the country at ransom, hence the introduction of the 14 day window. Any decisions outside this window is ultravires. ConCourt should trade very carefully on this law otherwise some justices maybe found wanting. We don’t want to bring in judge Chikopo from Malawi to come and head tribunals again…

    • So @ConCourt, can you tell us what the Court has already heard in these 14 days you contend are for that purpose? Please tell us what the Court has heard and will passing Judgement next week outside of the Constitutionally mandated 14 days. Not even “Kadansa” HH himself during his POLITICAL SPEECH to the Court was he pleading his case based on the silly arguments you are advancing here.

      In fact, the Court itself ruled that 14 days means just that, 14 calendar days. And the Petition case was supposed to be concluded at 11:59 pm last Friday. So your interpretations have ZERO Legal backing. As a concerned Citizen, what should be bothering you is why the same Court made a 180-degree U-turn on its own ruling only hours later—or maybe I have set my hopes to high for my Country!

    • I have always recommended going back to Zambian languages. CiZungu cuvuta. Ba Yambayamba read the darn constitution! “To be heard within” simply means to commence the proceedings in 14 days. Unfortunately for you it does not say when it should be decided/concluded. It would have been silly and utter incompetence on the part of framers to include a time limit. Decision should be made when the aggrieved are afforded due process.

  12. Ba upnd now ve no direction. 1st they were declaring that they wld win the elections. They lost. Now they run to court with a dull evidenceless petetion. Most of it is thrown out. Now they want 2 days to explain a skeleton of a lost cause. Leave them. They will lose even after an extension by the court that they themselves r calling “kangaroo PF court”. Its a court when it suits them. They call it names when its does not go their way. We will c u, u ve 2 days!!!!

  13. Be a good Judges,for comments just like you be none partisans,ECL refused to to hand over instruments of power to the Speaker of national Assembly,is that NT miscarriage of justice? 14 days passed is not that miscarriage of justice? So to balance all these two the zconcourt is final and this is justice

  14. Stop threatening the Constitution Judges they know what they are doing President Lungu appointed them He knew that these are professionals period.everything is balanced 2days given to UPND and 2 days given to PF let them bring witnesses if are false witnesses and wrong evidence Judges will throw them out .Give them the rope to hang themselves.But if we are blocking them there will be a question mark.The truth is the truth a lie is a lie.

  15. We know that the preparation of food is not done as an end in itself. It is done for the ultimate good that food is made available to those who will eat it. Those entrusted with preparing it, don’t stop in the midst of doing so, just because the time allotted to its preparation has expired. No. In the unfortunate event that time runs out while the meal is still being prepared, it’s unthinkable, indeed unnatural, for anyone, however criminally-minded, to call time-out the cooking; turn-off the stove and the oven. Why? Because the ultimate good, i.e., making the food available to those hungry stomachs waiting for it, is the greater good. Over-running the time of preparing that time becomes is both inconsequential and excusable. So, in this case. Justice is the ultimate good; the greater…

  16. continued:……So, in this case. Justice is the ultimate good; the greater good. Over-running the time needed in its execution is excusably inconsequential. Like a delayed pregnancy, it’s an inconvenience we can stomach; the over-due birth of a new baby being the greater good – i.e., that which we get because of it.

    • @Meimatungu, have you ever watched the cooking show called HELL’S KITCHEN on FOX channel (here in America) hosted by Gordon Ramsay? That is more like the situation we have with this Petition.

      I just think it is that kind of cooking done on that show (HELL’S KITCHEN) which compares more accurately in this situation since the cooking is more “business” oriented than that of one’s “ba Gogo” at some village in Dundumwezi. Since the Petition has time limits (just like in the show) and has a lot to do with the serious “business” of running a Country—my thoughts!

  17. HH’s self centredness supported by his minions are a danger to the country. Let this circus end this week and the country moves on. After benefiting from selling of our companies and our jobs to South Africans, this HH now wants power and claims to be a saviour. What a joke! Only minions follow HH. We need better options than HH after Lungu in 2021

    • Please do not insult the nearly half of the Zambian voters that voted for HH. “Only minions follow HH”!

      And that is not even including those voters whose votes were stolen from them!

    • Why are you in such a hurry to abandon this case?

      You wanted a constitution that would stand the test of time. Well, here is the first test in a series of tests.

      To be effective this constitution will have to be refined and this is the beginning of the process.

  18. These corrupt id1ots (Concourt) judges have to step aside. they have messed up this case beyond redemption.
    Both PF and UPND will NEVER Trust these imbeciles. So, whatever decision they will make from now on wards, won’t be respected by anyone. They have compromised the judiciary and worst of all the poor Zambian electorate, so the best thing for them is to resign forthwith period. The supreme court needs to take over and stop this case now as it is has failed completely. Then the decision of ECZ to prevail and let Lungu be inaugurated stat.

  19. ConCourt judges may have just corrected the initial counting error. They added 4 days for the case to be heard and disposed off in line with 14 working days which excludes weekends and public holidays in Zambia. Count the number of days the court sat and how many are they? Patience is better than war!

  20. Come Monday,
    ECL lawyers ask the court wich law the court is using to extended the seating

    Court fails to explain

    ECL lawyers leave the court and advises to proceed with inauguration with or without court approval
    HH, GBM starts weeping in the court

  21. If PF won this election cleanly. Why cry for the lapse of time. Let’s conclude it with evidence. We shall congrat you. Don’t force your self to rule us.Give us time. If anything it should have been 90 days. Issues of governance can’t be hurriedly.

    • Baba, it is the CONSTITUTION OF YOUR COUNTRY that is CRYING OUT FOR HELP because it has been R@PED in broad daylight by a Court that seems to be adrift at sea!

      If you can’t appreciate this simple fact then you are not worthy of the Citizenship that this very Constitution confers on you. Because you have an OBLIGATION as a Citizen to DEFEND and PROTECT this very Constitution you want to CONVENIENTLY ABROGATE to suit your political agenda. IT IS A SHAME REALLY!

  22. The ruling by the ConCourt was very good, because it is not just about following the constitution but about executing justice. In this way even if the court is to finally say Edgar Lungu won the election of August 2016 it will be easier for the opposition to accept because they were heard…in fact what the Concourt has done is following its earlier statement that the Conclusion will be this Thursday…it would be injustice if the court without hearing out the plaintiff’s story and witnesses to say time is up ..

  23. “Whilst justice is said to be above all, however, it is not above the Constitution. “. Dont confuse yourself and other………Justice should ALWAYS be above the constitution.. The whole purpose of having a constitution is to have justice.. If we can not have justice then we should not have the constitution not even the penal code or any other laws.

  24. Well spoken Mr sinkamba, it does not mean that when you are in opposition you have to oppose everything NO! A wrong is a wrong regardless of who messed up period. So these judges are the most disgraceful human beings both to the nation and the world at large. I can’t trust these judges any more, if they were my relatives i was going to disown them just like i have done with GBV and his boss kachema hypocrite hell ( HH). But just wait after the inauguration of ECL, all of you your jobs will be no more, mark ma words. Don’t say i did not inform u.

  25. That is why the constitution says 14 days baba. It means that the oetitioners must prepare a solid case and present it successfult within the 14 days. In other words this is serious business bordering in the security of the nation and other national interests. It is not the usual underfive politics of play station games.
    Anyway we wait to hesr from our President and government tomorrow. If they say we dunuma reverse we do likewise.

  26. By extending its sittings by 4 days the concourt has actually saved its
    integrity and credibility because both parties have been granted equal time to present their cases.

  27. What Concourt did by extending the Petetion Hearing Period was to uphold the 14 Working Day Rule which the Petetionioners had advised. Concourt is a New Court with New Judges so many mistakes were made by all parties to the Petetion. Having made the decision to hold the Petetion Hearings for 4 days up to 8th Sept Concourt must now stick to this decision and implement it without fail. Backtracking on this decision will be a Constitutional disaster. Tumoro Concourt without fail must Order Lungu to step down and transfer all instruments of power to the Speaker of Parliament. Lungu must not be allowed to interfere with the Petetion processes and Dr Matibini as Acting President will restore order and the Petetion Hearings can begin earnest and finish on the 8th of Sept. To meet the deadline…

  28. It’s interesting that the issue of the interpretation of Articles 103 and 104 has taken a back seat to that of the extended petition time. This is exactly what the framers of the Constitution wanted to avoid. Having a president elect in possession of the instruments of power even when a petition has been filed. Right now EcL is sitting pretty. Failure of the Concourt to address these two pertinent issues from the very beginning is the real travesty of justice. What or who can stop ECL’ inauguration should his lawyers insist the petition period has lapsed? The blame lies squarely on the Concourt…Dislike him or not John Sangwa warned us about the lack of experience of some of the judges sitting on the Concourt…

    • You need to look at article 101 before you jump to 103 and 104. Then analyse issues with intellect. don’t just jump to what you want to say but read and understand everything, mwashala.

  29. Which one is a greater evil: 1. President Edgar Lungu breaking the Constitution by maintaining Cabinet Ministers even after Parliament is dissolved OR 2. Constitution Court breaking the Constitution so as to allow the Court hear HH and GBM.

    Besides, was it not the ConCourt (Justice Sitali) itself that initially misled the Petitioners when it stated that the main petition would be heard from Friday, only to somersault later and state that Friday would actually be the last day?

    Surelly, what is good for the goose is also good for the gander.

    The Constitution Court has failed to rule so far that ECL is illegally in the office at the moment. ECL should have have handed over power to the Speaker by this time pending determination of this matter.

    Where is the Rule of Law in this…

  30. This looks like we are almost in a constitution crisis, what role can the Chief Justice (CJ) play here?
    Is there a rule in the constitution which allows the CJ to preside or take over cases like the pompous, nincompoop former DPP Mutembo Ch1kala Nchito used to do as DPP, Anything similar to the CJ’s role here? Can some one with legal brains please advise. Because we are in trouble if this group of corrupt concourt judges are allowed to continue to preside over this case, we won’t get any meaningful result from them. Neither PF nor UPND will trust them, they have messed up this case irretrievably. Pity no appeal after this morons court.

    • @ Chanda we yaya “proud” Umubemba inkonko

      Finally someone on this site is asking the right questions!

      Firstly, do not confuse the stipulation that there is no appeal in ConCourt decisions with jurisdiction of the Court. The ConCourt was put in place with a limited mandate to decide on CONSTITUTIONAL matters and hear petitions related to that. Secondly, we have a SUPREME COURT, and that means exactly that -SUPREME!

      There is no other Court above it, not even the ConCourt. Obviously we cannot have TWO “supreme” Courts!

      So while a ConCourt judgement on a particular case cannot be appealed, the Supreme Court can still hear cases related to the ConCourt to decide on procedural impropriety, bias and makeup of the bench.

      QED!

  31. “should a man be send to the gallows because time to hear his side of the story has run out.”Attorney Zaloumis. By the way,if the law says the petition will be heard in 14 days,it’s 14 days.We must not count the 4 days in which the petition was not heard,because that will be not consistent with what is written.The judges realized this error in their interpretation of the constitution and,hence,added not 2 nor 5 but 4 days to match what is written in the constitution.

  32. It’s was simple their was no bases on which the ConCourt would make a fair judgement therefore it was important to move the court case to this week. Only laws made by God are final. It’s in the interest of every Zambian to ensure justice is observed. If PF won the elections let them defend themselves because there are questions to be answered. I honest don’t trust PF because it’s a group of liers. Lungu him selves broke the law.

  33. The circus that is going on now is worse than what we saw in 2014, when Michael Sata died. At that time it took the boldness of the Central Committee of PF to suspend the President of the Party.
    Time has come for us to use the services of the same team, so that order can be restored to this great country.
    The ConCourt has been taken over by con men and women who have no interest in the peace of this country.
    The people voted and the losers, lost. This country has been brought to a stand still by losers and we have all become spectators.

    We have prayed and God has answered our prayers and given us leaders to lead us for the next 5 years. ConCourt, according, to our constitution doesn’t have the luxury of time. The case came to an end on Friday night and the next event is to have…

  34. Well said [email protected] the concourt had concluded this petition on Friday night it could have sat for 10 days instead of the stipulated 14 days.We don’t have to include weekends mwebantu,on weekends the courts don’t sit.Simple logic we are debating.

  35. The people who keep citing the “14 days” deliberately ignore the fundamental constitutional right to justice and right to be accorded a fair trial. Had the same ConCourt prematurely aborted the trial due to elapse of the said ’14 days’, they would also have violated the same constitution. Clearly this means some parts of this constitution clash and contradict with one another. In that situation a fundamental right takes precedence.

    The precedence the ConCourt they are alleged to have set, if anything, is a good thing. That’s you carry out a miscarriage of justice due to time, especially we are talking about 4 days delay.

    By the way “14 days” could mean ’14 working days’ especially that they weren’t sitting over the weekend. Also in my opinion the 14 days mean the…

  36. The constitution says 14 days,not 14 working days or 14 calendar days.So here the most reasonable period to arrive at is 14 working days.And why are people so anxious to conclude this matter when in America it takes 60days before the President-elect is inaugurated?I say to the Judges DON’T BE INTIMIDATED OR BRIBED.LET THE PEOPLE’S WILL AND JUSTICE PREVAIL.

  37. continue reading…
    Also in my opinion the 14 days mean the start of trial, and not the end of trial. And even it was the actual conclusion of the trial… the words say “shall hear… within 14 days”. Thus far the ConCourt has only heard issues related to the case for 10 DAYS ONLY. So there you have it!

    I wish that the same energy being expended over the “14 days” could be extended to the many violations of the same constitution that Lungu has been doing. Hypocrites!

  38. Tomorrow the Judicial Complaint Authority will be overwhelmed with the complaints concerning the misconduct by the Concourt. I am drafting one as well.It is clearly written in our constitution that no matter how unjust an article might seem to some people, it should be followed.

  39. According to article 128(3), a person who alleges that the constitution has been abrogated by a person or government authority is supposed to petition the constitutional court and not write news stories as a way of defending the constitution. This is the was the constitution has provided for its defense not through taking unilateral and unharmed lawful actions like some are suggesting they will do. Let’s be level minded and respect the courts. Those who feel the constitution has been abrogated should petition the constitutional court.

  40. The Concourt judges blundered big time by extending the hearing period of the useless and meaningless petition. So where is written in our constitution that a petition will be heard within 14 WORKING DAYS? If the constitution states 14 days without any qualifications, it simply means 14 days and the that time period elapsed on 2nd September 2016 at 23:59 hours.
    The Concourt must realise that they have halted business economically and should be bald enough to apologise, rescue themselves and throw out this stup1d petition.

    • @44 Danger
      You are dangerously ignorant. The power to interpret the law is vested in the Courts; not in the citizenry at large. Therefore, whether the ’14 days’ phrase refers to 14 working days or 14 natural days, is for the courts, not for you, to determine. Once the courts determine that the phrase ’14 days’ refers to 14 working days, and not 14 natural days, then their interpretation takes precedence over whatever undisclosed intention the lawmakers may have had at the time of enacting that piece of Legislature.

      By practice, therefore, the way the courts interpret the law is part of the law-making process. Should the lawmakers get disgruntled by the way the courts have interpreted a particular part of Legislation, they are at liberty to amend that particular piece; in this…

    • @44 Danger
      Continued:
      Should the lawmakers get disgruntled by the way the courts have interpreted a particular part of Legislation, they are at liberty to amend that particular piece; in this case, to stipulate categorically that the phrase 14 days’ refers to ‘ABC’ and not ‘DEF,’ whatever that may be. Until such amendment is made, the courts will continue to enjoy the presumption of considering their interpretation as the official meaning.

  41. But, above all the legal and constitutional technical niceties lie Substative Justice! Justice must not only be seen to be done, but must be done!

    First, the Constitution provides for fourteen days – it does not talk about a fortnight or two weeks, why use the word days? The Constitution is precise, forteen days, remembber? ordinarily when legal, contractual, or business cavenants or promises are made they refer to working days, excluding weekends and public holodays.

    Second, the Constitution refers to Hearing, but does not specify the actual Trial and determination, why? We know that hearing relates to the preliminary matters preceding the Trial, and not to the trial itself! Why then must the Petition not to be the subject of Trial?

    The highest Court in the can amend or repeal a…

  42. Tell Kamba and his friend to leave the lawns of the con court free before 20hrs or i will flush them out.If the police fear you us we are professionals.

  43. TRADE CAREFULLY- DOES THE CONCOURT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO HANDLE THE LAWSUIT AT HAND?
    =====================================
    Judging from the happenings in the Concourt,I am afraid we will end up going through all the articles of the constitution and finish the syllabus thereof instead of leaving it up to the professionals to competently discharge their duties judiciously. Every professional undertaking has brains at different levels and all these levels engage in bickering and in different innuendos. I would have loved a situation where the Concourt came out in the open and declared that they did not have the capacity to handle a presidential results petition. It feels like we are all just learning first hand and struggling together with the lawyers to understand what the highlighted…

  44. Petition has to be served on incumbent president at state house. Security and OP deliberately do not allow you in. Your 14 days are thereby almost finished.

    You have 50 eye witnesses to prove rigging. Incumbent has 6 lawyers and each lawyer needs chance to cross examine your first witness. That alone takes 5 days. At the end your other 49 witnesses cannot be heard as they are out of time.

    The incumbent plays the game of filibuster tactics putting up time wasting preliminary issues to finish up your 14 days and thereby sabotage the hearing of your Petition.

    Where is justice in all this ?

  45. If I was Hilda Chibomba having made this blunder I would revert to the earlier position of interpretation of 14days without weekends and have it fixed there coz there would be no breach then whatsoever. So to save the mess already created here go UPND interpretation of14days, then all cases in future shall follow that counting.

  46. We are a poor country, perhaps not third world as we have potential in our natural resources to make the bottom list of the Developing country list in EMEA group. BUT, and it’s a big but, must we spend an inordinate amount of our time wringing our hands, ho-ing and huming in our desperation to prove we are a Democratic and Human Rights Lovers?

    What about concentrating on safeguarding the country from chancers who would create violence to cover their greed? We have a volatile situation with regional divisions and tribal patterns of voting proving we are divided. The duty of any law that supports our gov’t system is to ensure protection against FRIVOLOUS constitutional challenges. What merit does HH’s have? His case has been shown to have been ill prepared and without evidence.

    • Supposing we accept the nature of the African Man, and put in place a protection mechanism, in a form of an assessing body that can study any challenge reasoning to an election. If we appoint a legal body that can within 24 hours of a clear winner and a disgruntled challenger, assemble and in a form of interlocutory investigation, look at any evidence the disgruntled party has to determine if a challenge to election results be allowed. We need a way of preventing bitter and twisted immoral/amoral candidates such as HH and his sidekick GBM from delaying the ushering in of a new president. As it stands we know, we have given a stand and centre stage in a horrific theatrical production which serves only to allow HH to spite His Excellency President Lungu’s deserved win. No wonder…

  47. No wonder we beheld the spectacle of HH holding a media briefing yesterday, a Saturday on which this much claimed. Church elder in SDA church should have been doing a Elder Duties! Oh No, instead, he was breaking the rule of using the media to break the confidential hearing by speaking about his smooth moves in the court which lead to his wringing the wings off Judges! We all accept that the Rights of individuals be respected. Every Joe in Zambia know HH is just being malicious and showing bad character in bitterness. Most people would take a pill.

  48. PEOPLE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THE ISSUE BEHIND THE PETITION BUT TIME FRAME. ANY LAW WAS PUT IN PLACE TO HELP AND HEAR THE PETITIONS AND IF TIME IS THE IMPORTANT FACTOR THEN WHY DID LUNGU NOT GIVE OUT POWERS TO THE SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY? WHAT RULING HAS THE VERY COURT DELIVERED TO THE PEOPLE OF ZAMBIA?
    DONT LOOK AT WHAT YOU FEEL SUITS YOU BUT ALSO HAVE THE FEELINGS OF THE GRIEVED. IT IS NOT ABOUT TIME FRAME BUT THE ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT. ZAMBIA IS NO LONGER ONE ZAMBIA ONE NATION. IF IT MEANS DIVISION LET US NOW SCRAMBLE AND DIVIDE IT FOR THE SAKE OF PEACE.
    THIS WILL HEAL THE COUNTRY. IF TOMORROW ANYTHING FAILS TO TAKE PLACE BECAUSE OF PF THUGS, THEN WE ARE READY TO GO BRA ( BAROTSE VIEW). EXPECT THAT AND LUNGU WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE.

    • Why ifi ma Capital letters. Just write normally . If what you write makes sense we acknowledge not because it’s in broad letters.

Comments are closed.

Read more

Local News

Discover more from Lusaka Times-Zambia's Leading Online News Site - LusakaTimes.com

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading