UPND MPs taking the 'walk of shame' out of Parliament after the suspension was announced
UPND MPs taking the ‘walk of shame’ out of Parliament after the suspension was announced

Constitutional Court Judge Enoch Mulembe has ordered the matter in which 52 UPND Members of Parliament stayed away from the Presidential address on March 17th, 2017, to proceed to the full court for determination.

This was in response to an application by the opposition UPND to have the petitioner’s action struck out.

In the case of Richard Mumba versus Garry Nkombo and 51 others, the petitioner has asked the Constitutional Court to declare the seats vacant for misconduct.

This is in a matter where 52 UPND MPs stayed away from the Presidential address of the National Assembly which is provided for under article 86(1) of the Constitution of Zambia amendment Act 2 of 2016.

The petitioner further prayed to the court that the 52 MPs should NOT be allowed to re-contest their seats during the life of the current parliament provided for in article 72(2) (C) and Article 72 (4) of the constitution.

In response the respondents made an application to strike out the petition on grounds that the petition and the affidavit verifying facts did NOT disclose any cause of action against the respondents capable of being sustained by the court.

They added that the petition was an abuse of the court process.

In his ruling, Judge Mulembe agreed with the petitioner that the issues raised deserve attention of the court to provide interpretation on constitutional implications.

He said there are important constitutional matters that include the question of jurisdiction.

Judge Mulembe consequently dismissed the application to struck out the petition, but made no orders as to costs.

[Read 91 times, 1 reads today]
Loading...

34 COMMENTS

    • Let the concourt become exited and declare the UPND seats null and void and see the political tremour that will hit Zambia and eventually force Lungu and his con artist judges to be dismissed.

      If that happens then Zambia is a dictatorship.

      But any way the con court judgement is highly unconstitutional and illegal for there is no where in the laws of Zambia where an MP can loose his seat for walking out.

      This another abuse of the concourt by Lungu to hold on to power.

      0

      0
    • All these PF comments is wishful thinking.

      PF ministers seats must be nullified for breaching the constitition by ovet staying during elections in to have undue advantage of using government machinery during the campaigns.

      What PF ministers and Lungu did is unconstitutional and illegal. But what UPND did is not a constituitional breach.

      Let them go ahead nullify UPND MPs seats and wait for Patricia Scotland s condemnation again. In UK even government MPs walk out on during voting sessions to avoid a humiliation. I have never heard any MP loose their seat.

      MPs loosing their seats for walking out only happens in a banana republic like Zambia.

      0

      0
    • So to id1ots issues of governance raised by UPND are irrelevant. Nothing can be achieved if government in po

      0

      0
    • IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT AND YOU DON’T KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN WHEN YOU ABUSE CERTAIN SECTIONS OF THE ZAMBIAN CONSTITUTION- ABSCONDING PARLIAMENT, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE NATIONAL PRESIDENT IS ADDRESSING THE PARLIAMENT THEN YOU DON’T EVEN DESERVE TO BE AN MP. BECAUSE, EVEN AFTER BEING AN MP YOU HAVEN’T EVEN BOTHERED TO STUDY THE CONSTITUTION OF ZAMBIA. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THESE TYPE OF MPs ARE IN THE MAJORITY IN ZAMBIA. MIND YOU READING AMONG ZAMBIANS IS VERY POOR. BLINDLY, THE UPND MPs FURTHER TOOK THE MATTER TO THE CONCOURT. SINCE THEY HAVE LOST- THEY DON;T HAVE A JOB AS MPs. THEIR POSITIONS ARE VACANT AND UP FOR ELECTIONS.

      0

      0
    • @Nostra

      Paying back their salaries is not enough. PF ministers actions influenced the 2016 elections in favour of PF unfairly and therefore amounts to systematic rigging by the PF. Their action were not only illegal but unconstitutional.

      That said the best outcome of the case against PF ministers to nullify their seats and bar them from recontesting the seats.

      As for the UPND which constitution provision did they breach by protesting within their freedom of expression?

      All this judgement is clear evidence that PF indeed rigged 2016 elections. Thats why PF judges and courts are dragging their feets to continue the UPND right to be heard case in courts as more evidence of PF rigging is coming out

      For how long Lungu continue to rig elections His day like Mugabe is fast…

      0

      0
  1. So if they nulify pf seats it’s ok but when they pass judgement against you *****s then it’s a crime and they are being unfair .
    Respect the out come from the courts weather in your favour or against

    0

    0
  2. Its a fair judgement. Though truth is its not healthy to democracy. UPND must act responsibly as largest opposition.

    We need constructive checks and balances. Not personal fights. It won’t help to take politics personal. Refusing to recognize the President won’t take UPND anywhere good. The system already recognizes him and all citizenry are subject to that system.

    0

    0
    • The fact of the matter is UPND should be responsible for their actions…they are not even ashamed to seat in Parliament and get all those allowances for doing nothing whilst their constituents do not even get what they are paid in a month for the whole year.

      0

      0
  3. I am begining to tink that this Concourt is a an experiment gone wrong. Its like “God’s Case where there is no appeal”. HH is still crying that his case was not heard, no appeal. The former cabinet ministers who overstayed MUST payback their all the money they got for the period they were in office “ïllegally”, no appeal. Now these 52 MPs might loose their seats and again no appeal. It appears that the Concourt only has two rules; Rule No. 1 “The Concourt is always right”. Rule No. 2 “If you think the Concourt is wrong, refer to rule No. 1”. Ba learned Lawyer, please advise, but don’tgive me a bill.

    0

    0
  4. Useless opposition!! Instead of spending more time raising real issues that will benefit their constituents, they squander all that time in courts fighting for personal matters that only benefits the ego of their tribalistic leader. I hope they get what is coming their way. upnd is destroying the democracy we fought for in 1991.

    1

    0
    • This is exactly what Stephen Sackur of the BBC was telling Hakainde…there are so many issues like issues out there that need answers and they are more worried about themselves!!

      0

      0
  5. The 52 upnd MPs may soon dance “pelete” as our concourt judges do not joke!!they lose their seats and the new constitution wont allow them to recontest the same seats or if allowed,many of them would have no many to compete with PF candidates who will be properly funded by their chinese sponsors!!!Zambia may face expensive by elections in bantustan areas all because of evil HH who control his MPs like ROBOTICS!!
    Bembas say “MALIBU YAKUILOMBELA!!”these upnd MPs thought they were bigger than Zambia and they can only listen to HH forgeting that HH is not a Zambian Constitution!!
    BRAVO CONCOURT FOR THIS JUDGEMENT-GO FURTHER BY DECLARING ALL 52 SEATS VACANT AND NEVER ALLOW CURRENT UPND MPS TO STAND DURING BY ELECTIONS SO THAT THOSE DULL HH FOLLOWERS(MPS) CAN LEARN IT IN A HARSH…

    0

    0
  6. Continue……
    SO THAT THOSE 52 DULL HH FOLLOWERS (MPS) CAN LEARN IT IN A HARSH WAY!!!we need order in our local politics.HH has painted the DEMOCRACY we faught for in 1990 black because of his evil way of doing politics!!SO THE CONCOURT SHOULD BRING SANIT IN OUR POLITICS!!ENOUGH IS ENOUGH FROM HH!!

    0

    0
    • Look at this kaponya proudly saying PF MPs have Chinese sponsored money for campaigns, do you think that money is for free ???

      You know being an ignorant theif is a curse on Zambia….

      0

      0
  7. Loosing is a clear indication that you tried. Finally, lets respect the judgement by doing what they instructed the lot to do and that is to pay back the monies. This is like illegal mining.

    0

    0
    • You have not even attempted to read the story before writing your comments. Talk about being dull!!

      0

      0
    • If you do not understand Kenyan Politics and Odinga best you don’t comment…its like Hakainde re-contesting General Elections if they were nullified overseen by the same ECZ executive and expecting to win. Odinga is way smarter than Hakainde …the only similarity they have is they are both very wealthy men!!

      1

      0
  8. Both u.nder5 and his u.p.ndonkeys are in their positions illegally. According to the law up.n.donkeys is registered by the Registrar of Societies to operate as a political party in conformity with the law and that includes conforming to their constitution. Their constitution requires the party to hold regular elections. Between 2006 and today they have not held elections, i.e. in 2011 and in 2016. In other words, u.p.ndonkeys is in breach of their constitution and therefore the law. Therefore the candidature of both un.der5 and his MPs in 2016 was illegal. They hold their offices illegally, both for U5 in the party and the MPs in the parry and as MPs. Is there another Richard Mumba to drag them to ConCourt to nullify their “elections”?

    0

    0
  9. jay jay u are the only blogger who is non
    partisan on this forum.You comments are always either way regardless of which party is on the right or wrong keep it up

    1

    0
  10. What else can you call a party whose members cannot think on their own? The other day U5 indicated that the party belongs to him and his wife. “….My wife Mutinta and I thank you for coming to renew your membership. You must go out to recruit more members to join ‘our’ party…”. Now if the occassion was at their house maybe it would carry a different meaning. U5 does not speak on behalf the party leaderrship but on behalf of his wife. And the leaders and followers are quiet about it. Reminds one of Grace Mugabe!!
    Well, to answer my own question, the only suitable term is Donkeys, much as I would want to use a more polite term like “Ass”.

    0

    0
  11. “The petitioner further prayed to the court that the 52 MPs should….”
    Why is the petitioner pPRAYING to the court? Is the court a religion? Are the judges Gods?

    0

    0
  12. The most useress MPs with a useress party to ever grace parliament. I am ashamed that this is what the 3 provinces gave us.

    0

    0
  13. They represent Namwala interests, let them go for good! We do not need them in Parliament! They do not know why they were elected. You never know maybe the are the same guys who burn markets.

    0

    0

Comments are closed.