By Isaac Mwanza
US based Professor Muna Ndulo has tried so hard to make a case in what appears to be defense of why the Judiciary must resist some calls from a section of the public to cite the UPND leader for contempt of court. He is one of those from the legal fraternity who has joined in the current debate on whether Mr. Hichilema should be cited or not.
What appear to have attracted the attention of the learned Professor, however, is not any concerns or condemnation of the remarks made by Mr. Hichilema against the 3 Constitutional Court Judges. When Mr. Hichilema made those remarks, it was even difficult for the then LAZ leadership of Linda Kasonde to ignore those remarks. They condemned Mr. Hichilema. The Professor was very quiet in the United States, maybe because he found nothing wrong with those remarks of his good colleague, Mr. Hichilema.
Soon as the public walk up from slumber and begun calling for Mr. Hichilema to prove his case before the Court that judges are “corrupt, evil musketeers, etc”, it has woken up the minds and raised the eyebrows of the Professor.
Our Professor Muna Ndulo has questioned the interest of a citizen in reporting what he thought is a criminal offence and he wants the citizen to disclose his locus standing in reporting the alleged offence of contempt. The question should is whether the Professor thinks citizens have locus standing in reporting offences or not.
But the Professor has not stopped at that. He has gone further to try and lecture one of the distinguished Deputy Chief, Marvin Mwanamwamba, over his response to Henry Chibombo using what are termed as general principles of ethics in the legal profession as opposed to using the applicable law in Zambia which require Judges to be accountable to the people of Zambia in performance of their duties, as per Article 236(2)(b) of the Constitution of Zambia.
The two issues raised by Prof Muna Ndulo are thus basic theories on the international scene and general in nature. Practically, Zambia’s Supreme law require that judges remain accountable to citizens and there is no better form of expression of this accountability than for Judiciary to respond to citizens. Similarly, the issue of locus for any citizen to report a criminal offence is grounded in both our supreme and statutory law.
What Professor Muna Ndulo should have concerned himself with is an explanation of whether the remarks made by Mr. Hichilema do, indeed, constitute a citable offence in contempt or not. As a learned person at law and one who espouses defense in the Independence of the judiciary, Professor Muna Ndulo should have be more concerned about scandalous attacks on the judges that has set precedent for many politicians who disagree with court judgments than in the letter written by the Deputy Chief Justice.
But whether the public expect to hear Professor Muna Ndulo condemn the scandalous attacks is highly doubtful. The only thing I agree with Professor Muna Ndulo is that the matter of contempt is more likely to come up before the courts soon but that will require the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Constitutional Court itself to call those shots. It doesn’t necessarily need citizens to do so.
Views expressed here do not represent the views of any institution he may belong to or media but represents the views of the the Author
Below is the Prof Ndulo’s exrcept
In a letter addressed to Chief Justice Irene Mambilima dated August 14, 2018 a Lufwanyama resident, Henry Chilombo asked justice Mambilima to inquire and investigate the comments made by Mr Hakainde Hichilema last year towards Judges Palan Mulonda; Anne Sitali and Mungeni Mulenga. Mr Chilombo stated that he believed that the expressed sentiments against the three judges amounted to contempt of court. Chilombo added that he understood also that Hichilema was wrong to accuse the Zambian judiciary, whilst in South Africa last year, of corruption and being under the control of the President. This was a letter by an ordinary citizen written outside the context on any judicial process. Mr Chilombo does not explain what standing he has which distinguishes him from the other 15 million Zambians. He did not also disclose how whatever outcome of such a weird request for inquiry would personally affect him over and above other Zambians. The inescapable inference is that this letter is orchestrated by someone. It would seem then that this bird that is dancing by the roadside must have some faceless drumbeaters urging it on. Surprisingly, the Deputy Chief Justice decided to engage the private citizen and responded to the letter
Thus, responding to the Chilombo’s letter, Justice Mwanamwambwa in a letter dated August 15 addressed to Chilombo stated that; ‘the procedure on contempt of court was that, it is the prerogative of the court or adjudicator attacked or insulted to have the culprit summoned and charged with contempt. In this particular case, it was the Constitutional Court that was attacked and insulted. Thus the Constitutional Court judges are aware of the attacks and insults, but for unexplained reasons, they did not charge the culprit with contempt of court. In essence, it is not for the Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice or the Supreme Court, to make an inquiry into the matter. In fact, the matter does not need an inquiry because evidence is already there’ – the letter seemed to suggest since it is documented in the form of a report of utterances by the named culprit. Justice Mwanamwambwa went on to say that the Supreme Court does not tolerate attacks and insults on it. Justice Mwanamwambwa went a step further to copy his letter to the Chief Justice and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
It is our view that this is an extraordinary letter and we would argue a step without precedent in the common law jurisprudence. It must necessarily be extraordinary because it is a novel procedure for the exercise of the judicial function. We do not make this assertion lightly because the letter not only makes finding of fact, but also gives a verdict without the due process of the law. One would have thought that judges should be the first to insist on ethical rectitude and respect for the settled tenets of due process. It is our view that judges should not be responding to letters concerning matters that are or might come before courts. Judges are oracles of law. They are big masquerades and their best communication to society is through the rigorous respect for due process and judicious use of their judicial powers exercised through judgements upon proper hearing and determination. Hence, Judges should speak only through judgements in dealing with cases that are before them or matters that might come before them. The comments made by the Deputy Chief Justice are not comments made in court when the Deputy Chief Justice is sitting and is empaneled as a court and is exercising judicial powers. The letter gives a legal opinion on a matter that is not before the Deputy Chief Justice
We contend here that judges are prohibited by well-established judicial ethics as articulated in the Bangalore principles of Judicial Conduct and in codes of Conduct developed in most common law jurisdictions. Rule 2. 4 of the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct states as follows:
‘A judge shall not knowingly, while a proceeding is before, or could come before, the judge , make any comment that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such proceeding or impair the manifest fairness of the process. Nor shall the judge make any comment in public or otherwise that might affect the fair trial of any person or issues.’
According to the Bangalore Principles a judiciary of undisputed integrity is the bedrock institution essential for ensuring compliance with democracy and the rule of law. Even when all other protections fail, it provides a bulwark to the public against any encroachments on its rights and freedoms under the law. These observations apply domestically within the context of each nation State and globally, viewing the global judiciary as one great bastion of the rule of law throughout the world. Not only have the majority of states in the world adopted the Bangalore Principles, many have modelled their own Principles of Judicial Conduct on them. International Organizations including the United Nations, the American Bar Association, International Commission of Jurists and Judges of the member States of the Council of Europe have given their support to the Bangalore Principles. Our own Zambian Act, The Judicial (Code of Conduct Act) of 1999, is modelled on the Bangalore principles, it states in section 8(1) that: ‘A Judicial Officer or member of staff shall not while proceedings are pending or impeding (meaning could arise) in any court make any public comment that may affect or may reasonably be construed to affect the outcome of the proceedings or impair its fairness or make any comment that might substantially interfere with a fair trial or hearing
Cannon 3A (6) of the 1972 American Bar Association Model Code of Judicial Conduct stated:
‘A judge should abstain from public comment about a pending or impending proceeding in any court. In the Boston’s Children Case, the US Court of Appeals, First Circuit, observed that: ‘in newsworthy cases where tensions may be high, judges should be particularly cautious about commenting on pending litigation. Interested members of the public might well consider the Judge’s actions as expressing an undue degree of interest in the case, and thus pay special attention to the language of the judge’s comments.’
Comments about a case pending before another judge or jury in the same court or jurisdiction as the commenting judge, can also be reasonably expected to affect its outcome or impair its fairness or at least create that appearance. A rule prohibiting such comments guards against the danger that a judge would feel pressured or would appear to feel pressured by the comments of a superior, peer and colleague or that a jury would accord deference or would appear to accord deference to an opinion expressed by a judge. Moreover, such a rule ensures that proceedings remain immune from outside influences, even if such influences are not specifically prejudicial.
The task of judging implies a measure of autonomy which involves the Judge’s conscience alone. Therefore, judicial independence requires not only the independence of the judiciary as an institution from other branches of Government; it also requires judges being independent from each other. In other words, judicial independence depends not only on freedom from undue external influence, but also freedom from undue influence which might in some situations come from the actions or attitudes of other judges. Judicial decision making is the responsibility of the individual judge, including each judge sitting in a collegiate appellant court.
In conclusion, we advise judges to resist the temptation of engaging the citizenry in the newspapers or responding to letters sent to them by members of the public no matter their motivation. No matter the temptation or provocation, Judges should remember the cardinal rule espoused by the Bangalore Principles and Codes of Judicial Conduct of Common law jurisdictions including Zambia. That rule is plain and simple, and it states that a judge should not make public comments on the merits of matters that might come before any court (his or her court or other courts). Courts are not advisory councils in the business of offering advisory opinions to busy bodies. Theirs is a judicial role given to them by the constitution to judge cases brought before them in accordance with the requirements of due process
Isaac Mwanza, please find better things to do in life. The question is does the deputy chief not have enough work to somehow look back at public statements and bring back old things. I think we are wasting resources focusing on HH. Where does freedom of speech stand in all this? The judges actions were questionable there is no doubt but HH expressed his fastruction perhaps using strong language but has the right to express fastruction if lack of professionality is observed. Please lets focus on more important things and leave this alone.
Everyone knows that the Zambian judiciary is at a low point. KangCourt is rotten,stinking with corruption from Lungu. The way they threw out the 2016 election petition damaged their reputation beyond repair. They demoted themselves to being Lungu’s tissue paper. Lungu will again use them for his 3rd term bid.
Charging HH will only further damage their reputation.
Freedom of speech anywhere in the world is done within the confines of the law. Citing hh for cotempt is a good example of the rule of law which under5s likes talking about of which i know they dont understand its definition. No one is saying hh will be imprisoned but he is just going through the process of the law.
HH had a right to express his frustration but he also committed an offence. If HH believes in rule of law, he cannot be breaking the law himself and using proxies like Ndulo to help him clean the mess. Am with Isaac on this one.
This issue is hot. The moment this goes to court, double h will go in afterwards. His carelessness will land him a jail term. We have a prima facie case at our hands. Ndulo is just an academic fellow.
Just ignore this professor. He’s got a personal agenda. Can you remember a single day when he’s been critical of HH?
From Mwenda ofyo descendant
Here is a sequence of events mwebantu
Friday night – HH and GBM represent themselves in concourt, they are granted 2 days to argue their case beginning Monday and 2 days for other party
Weekend – Court does not sit
Monday – 8am the judgement (14 days elapsed) is given to head of concourt and has to go with it because majority has voted in favour i.e 3 of 5.
Biggest anomaly here is;
– how was the judgement ready at 8am on Monday when the court doesn’t sit at weekend?
– how and when was the Friday night decision overruled when the court doesn’t sit at weekends?
– Assuming the 3 judges in favour sat and conjured up the judgement at the weekend, is this proper?
If I were HH or GBM, I’d be aggrieved
Spaka, they were given 14 days to present their case. Why did the keep on bring up unnecessary injunctions for 13 of those days? On the last Friday the miraculously remembered to deal with the real issue, they election petition.
@#2–Please talk about the issue at hand, not personality.
People have misplaced priorities… politicians who are supposed to be serving as opposition but are instead preoccupied with court petitions and etc,, we re tired of this rubbish mwe ahh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SINCE THE JUDGES IN QUESTION HAVE NOT ACTED. LET THEM REMAIN SILENT FOR NOW. KNOWING HH, HE MAY DISPARAGE THEM ONCE MORE. BUT THEN THAT WILL BE THE RIGHT TIME TO DESCEND ON HIM LIKE A HEAP OF BRICKS. OTHERWISE NOW ITS TOO LATE AND HAS ATTRACTED UNNECESSARY SUSPICIONS.
Who does not know that Professor Ndulo is a UPND sympathiser and for the information of every one he cannot practice in Zambia cos he’s scared of Ziale hence he just teaches theories in the US.
@Fwanya – what an ass hole you are!
Scared of ZIALE when he taught your concourt president at ZIALE! Get an ass check you swine!
@Fwanya–Please talk about the issue at hand, but not people. You should show your reasoning by advancing reasons to support your arguments. Go back to school to learn critical thinking.
So you decide to ignore the questionable ethical conduct of the D/Chief Justice as raised by the Professor instead you focus on HH? This is sad.
Personally I am more concerned about the questionable ethical conduct of the once eminent judge who seems to be losing his way than HH’s tantrums.
Who is Isaac Mwanza at Law? Is he a Constitutional Lawyer or what? He should critic the”Bangalore Principles”instead of preaching to the Gallery. Lungu threatened Concourt Judges and warned them not to emulate Kenyan Supreme Court Judges over his 3rd Term Bid. Why is Chilombo,Musona and Isaac Manza not inciting Concourt and the DP to cite him for Contempt of Court? Individuals cannot incite ZRP and Courts what to do. If the Concourt Judges see Merits in citing HH for Contempt of Court then they should have done so on their own when HH made those remarks.Why now? Citing HH in this Case is as Good as Re-Hearing the Petition. After mishandling the Petition does Concourt want to revisit the Case? Time will tell.
Malabishi… dude trying to make himself relevant. Is this the ‘rebuttal’ you come up with? Professor Muna Ndulo is a respected law Professor; he cited many international accords and statutes in his arguments while you register none. Please stop reducing your inner self to minions and cadres all the time… check your conscience and integrity and look yourself in the mirror and try to find out what you stand for in life.
For your info Prof Muna Ndulo also wrote a lengthy article condemning the ConCourt and the way the botched that petition (ou might as well add him to the contempt proceedings) so what are you on about?
Yes the most judges in Zambia are corrupt, including this Mwanamwambwa D/CJ (what kind of a Lozi cheapens themselves like this like our crooked northerners? shame!).
Of late Muna Ndulo gives very partisan legal opinions, just like his friend Hansungule. In his article he even accused Henry Chilombo as being sponsored. Chilombo isn’t an officer of the Court, so there’s nothing wrong in what he did, but did Muna expect the Acting Chief Justice to ignore that letter? Does Muna Ndulo approve of what Hichilema said about the Judges? I don’t think Muna Ndulo could have held the same opinion if those were uttered by Edgar, so Muna has said is trash
After all Chilombo comes from a very pro Upnd area lufwanyama.
Did you miss the essence of what Prof Muna Ndulo said? He said it’s a judge’s business to offer legal opinions, presumptions and conclusions about a potential court case outside the confines of a court room the way Justice Mwanamwambwa acted. I would like to believe neither is it Muna Ndulo’s business to approve or disapprove what HH said.
Pursue important things like how your country is being auctioned off to China for small pieces of silver and many other things that is wrong and being perpetuated by your small god Lungu.
Sh!thole county for sure, a failed one for that matter.
Ndulo and Hansungule are proper UPND members. But I liked the short and concise response to Ndulo. Too many words can’t fill a basket. (1) A citizen has right to report any offense (2) the judiciary and judges are always accountable to people and they can’t be receiving letters without responding.
The article by Isaac is simple and to the point. The centiments by Muna highlights his own biasness towards his friend Hichilema. Muna finds all reasons no matter how unreasonable to defend his colleague. If Muna had come out in the open and declared his interest as a defense lawyer for the opposition leader (HH) this would make a lot of sense but merely hiding behind being a lawyer and comment biasly as he has been doing is being feeble minded and perhaps being blinded by some unknown factors.
How fair do people want our courts to be. Examples abound of how much the court has tried to be impartial. Just recently the court annulled the Registrars decision to deregister Kalabas DC. Kambwili has appealed his expulsion from PF and the court has taken its time to rule. Each time a Upnd cadre is convicted the courts become ” corrupt “. Mushipe has been banned from LAZ the ZWD calls it a collusion between the LAZ and PF. Such inconsistent behavior are signs of how intolerant and selfish this party is. It’s actually a dangerous party.
HH believes in rule of law, so take him before the rule of law to answer those criminal charges. He feels rule of law has broken down under Lungu because even him HH is able to evade justice because of his money.
HH was right….other countries heard their election results petitions in the courts including Zimbabwe…..incidentally lungu rushed to Zimbabwe before the results were official to try to advice munagagwa to throw out any election petition , just like he did, to try to paint a general picture….
Mungagwa refused and had the court case heard and now lungu is alone…
What can we expect from a Known UPND sycophants and zealot and enemy of progress..Trash and crap as usual
Exactly, Fwanya. Heads are filled with cow dung these people.
Mwenda ofyo descendantSeptember 9, 2018 at 10:44 am
“…Here is a sequence of events mwebantu
Friday night – HH and GBM represent themselves in concourt, they are granted 2 days to argue their case beginning Monday and 2 days for other party
Weekend – Court does not sit
Monday – 8am the judgement (14 days elapsed) is given to head of concourt and has to go with it because majority has voted in favour i.e 3 of 5.
Biggest anomaly here is;
– how was the judgement ready at 8am on Monday when the court doesn’t sit at weekend?
– how and when was the Friday night decision overruled when the court doesn’t sit at weekends?
– Assuming the 3 judges in favour sat and conjured up the judgement at the weekend, is this proper?
If I were HH or GBM, I’d be aggrieved also..”
Argue about…
Fwaya it’s a fact civil servants belonging to Upnd are enemies of progress. They are not patriotic but have total obedience to their supreme leader.
@ Zambian Citizen
Your statement that “…Heads are filled with cow dung these people…” shows your “intellectual” (LoL) “power” (LoL) absenteeism. Shame, you have great qualities of professional clown and arse l!cker.
Meanwhile corrupt Lungu and his sycophants are busy with their corruption tendencies, selling the country to China while you are busy pursuing HH and his remarks he made after the botched court case, more than one year after the fact. Unbelievable!
Prof Muna Ndulo is a human being despite being a lawyer so he has personal interests.This Ndulo thing and Hamusungule are known UPND cadres,therefore they must be ignored.Freedom of speech does not mean HH should be insulting innocent citizens.What would happen if all Zambians lost respect for our judges or judiciary?who can Govern this country?THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS I HATE UPND BECAUSE ITS CADRES SUPPORT EVERY NONSENSE AS LONG AS IT IS FROM THEIR god HH!!!Truth be told,HH errored by insulting Concourt judges.The way LAZ found Martha Mushipe guilty is the same way Concourt would find Kainde with a case to answer!!!
ALL WE WANT IS HH TO APPEAR IN CONCOURT THEN PROOF THAT JUDGES ARE CORRUPT.IF HE FAILS,THEN JUDGEMENT WILL BE PASSED!!!HH IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW IN ZAMBIA!!!
This Ndulo…
From Mwenda ofyo descendant
“..Here is a sequence of events mwebantu
Friday night – HH and GBM represent themselves in concourt, they are granted 2 days to argue their case beginning Monday and 2 days for other party
Weekend – Court does not sit
Monday – 8am the judgement (14 days elapsed) is given to head of concourt and has to go with it because majority has voted in favour i.e 3 of 5.
Biggest anomaly here is;
– how was the judgement ready at 8am on Monday when the court doesn’t sit at weekend?
– how and when was the Friday night decision overruled when the court doesn’t sit at weekends?
– Assuming the 3 judges in favour sat and conjured up the judgement at the weekend, is this proper?
If I were HH or GBM, I’d be aggrieved also..”
Isàac Mwanza is spot on. Prof Muna Ndulo is defending the indefensible and does not address key questions of HH contempt. HH committed a criminal offense and has to be held accountable. Citizens have a duty to report criminal offences. The only problem is that everyone grows cold feet when its about HH because the guy is filthy rich.
HH must submit himself to proving his case that judges are corrupt.
In as much as the professor’s writing seems one sided, you have to agree that he supports his arguments very well. But for Isaac not to acknowledge this exposes his bias
PROF NDULO IS LIKE ANY OTHER PROFESSORS WE HAVE IN ZAMBIA. GOOD AT LEGAL THEORIES. CAN ANYONE TELL ME HERE HOW MANY CASES PROF NDULO HAS WON IN ANY COURT ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD? HE IS A PROFESSOR OF THEORIES. SURELY, HOW DO U QUESTION A CITIZEN DUTY TO REPORT A CRIMINAL OFFENCE? PROF NDULO MUST ALSO KNOW THAT THE PRACTICE IN ZAMBIA, NOT THEORIES, IS THAT THE JUDICIARY IS ACCOUNTABLE TO CITIZENS AND HAS BEEN RESPONDING TO CITIZENS EXCEPT FOR MATTERS THAT ARE BEFORE COURT
Muna Ndulo win cases, not in courts of laws but through his writings in court of public opinion. Sadly, his bias towards UPND is all visible. How do u condemn a judge and fail to condemn the criminal himself?
Question!!! Doesn’t Muna Ndulo know where the Judicial Complaints Commission is or he is just used to writing while actual people do real battles? If he has complaint against Deputy Chief Justice, let him go to JCC. Isaac’s arguments are correct here.
What is frightening today in Zambia is the so called “elders” we are suppose to be looking to have lost direction. Before the genocide in Rwanda, the elders joined in the propaganda and hate that isolated the Tutsis and layed the groundwork for the massacre. Does Ndulo support the insulting of Judges?? What kind of country would hh run if he had such people to advise him?? Would we see a systematic and vicious clamp down of people from other tribes like we witnessed in Namwala?? Would characters like Ndulo, VJ, Mambo, Saunders etc fight to justify wrongs and back hh blindly and create an unruly society??
That’s a bit rich comming from PF , who’s leader , lungu let his senior minister CK go on air radio and TV and issue tribal attacks against Tongas ….
To be honest, this whole discourse on Concourt, HH, Supreme Court, Chilombo is worthless. It adds no value at all to the Nation. It is quite refreshing that the Concourt justices has ignored it all together up to date, and urge them to continue. As an old adage goes: “Let bye-gones be bye-gones, and let the sleeping dogs lie”. In any case, the justices remain guided by the Constitution of Zambia Amendment 2016 which provides in Article 122(1) that: “In the exercise of judicial authority, the Judiciary shall be subject only to this Constitution and the law and not be subject to the control or direction of a person or an authority”.
“…“In the exercise of judicial authority, the Judiciary shall be subject only to this Constitution and the law and not be subject to the control or direction of a person or an authority”…”
And that is the REAL ISSUE. Are our Judiciary servants of the PEOPLE and CONSTITUTION or “…subject to the control or direction of a person or an authority…”???
By the way, which provision of the Constitution or Constitutional Court Act are our “LEARNED” Justices using to entertain “Appeal” of the ministers on the matter of illegal staying in power and resulting illegal financial benefits?
For UPND, the rule of law is for the court to rule in their favour regardless of whether they are right or wrong. Once UPND forms government, only UPND members will win the cases in our courts of law. In the case at hand, the response to the letter was merely a clarification as to who should take action and does not in any way suggest encroachment in the judgment. This just provided guidance.
Judge Mwanamwambwa was prejudicial, how do you refer to an interested party as culprit? In my opinion, the deputy chief justice has helped destroy this case even before it has begun because HH will just claim that he can’t have a fair trial, as argued by the professor!
Issue is let HH be taken to court, like we do, and claim he can’t have fair trial. Am sure he will ask that he is tried at the Commonwealth. I don’t think Judge Mwanamwamba committed any breach. UPND lawyers would have already filed with the JCC. Truth is HH committed criminal offense and what is saving him is most likely the power he holds – financial and political. Justice for Sale in Zambia
@Mwenda ofyo descendant the word ‘culprit’ means ‘a person who is responsible for a crime or other misdeed’. Judge Mwanamwambwa was not prejudicial as he only said its up to the wronged to bring an action against the ‘culprit’. If you do not refer to the person in question as a ‘culprit’ what do you want him/her to be referred as? He is not saying he is guilty. Chizungu bwa?
I love the renewed awakening of Zambians to demand justice for all. If HH is seen to be above justice, then what country are we going to create? HH, like any other citizen, must not be seen to be above the law. He committed an offense and let him publicly apologise to those 3 judges of the ConCourt. Why is Chibomba defending HH over her own Judges? Why is DPP quiet? Zambia is a circus when it comes to justice. The powerful and the richer run away scotfree while poor ones are imprisoned
If it reads Muna Ndulo, then its shrouded in triba.l colours, and I go to sleep.
Muna Ndulo like Hansungule, they trib.ally interpret law.
Even as so called professors, you cannot distinguish their reasoning from Lazy tribal Jay Gay and other trib.al ilk like Spaka. But I respect Spaka because he has confirmed his triba.lism. These others including the professors try to practice tri.balism snake like, but we know them anyway.
You are a tribal bigot who delights in talking about tribalism every time. You lack reasoning. Why can’t you advance solid arguments?
So the contempt by trib.al Hacks is a criminal offence? No wonder triba.l Ndulo has come out guns blazing. If the prison sentence reaches the threshold of six months refer to the Constitution bane. No wonder!!
Ndulo, just come and lead the defence for your triba.l brother if you want him to have a remote chance of surviving this one.
Here is a sequence of events mwebantu
Friday night – HH and GBM represent themselves in concourt, they are granted 2 days to argue their case beginning Monday and 2 days for other party
Weekend – Court does not sit
Monday – 8am the judgement (14 days elapsed) is given to head of concourt and has to go with it because majority has voted in favour i.e 3 of 5.
Biggest anomaly here is;
– how was the judgement ready at 8am on Monday when the court doesn’t sit at weekend?
– how and when was the Friday night decision overruled when the court doesn’t sit at weekends?
– Assuming the 3 judges in favour sat and conjured up the judgement at the weekend, is this proper?
If I were HH or GBM, I’d be aggrieved also
Thank you,
Can we have the PF rats counter this ? Instead of insinuating immiginary tribal inclinations by the professor
our judiciary must put itself in order. its proving dangerous or suicidal to live in Zambia in poverty. a poor man can be convicted for killing a fly in his house while the rich can kill a human being and walk freely. that is what I see happening to HH contempt case. he is too powerful for the judges and the DPP to bring him to account. justice only becomes justice when they send us the poor to prison. maybe HH has done deals on his case and no one wants to talk about it. what happened to the President defending the Constitution and ensuring that justice is not selectively applied. this discussion won’t end until Zambians see HH apologise like Bishop Mambo did.
WANYEKA MUNZI!!!! THE CHICKENS ARE BACK AND HH KNOWS HIS DAY OF RECKONING IS FAST APPROACHING. MY ADVISE TO FELLOW POLITICIANS IS, CRITICISE JUDGES BUT DON’T BE SCANDALOUS. LUCKILY FOR HH, HIS GOT MONEY TO SAVE HIM OTHERWISE HE WOULD HAVE GONE IN. WHEN HE SAYS JUDGES ARE CORRUPT, MAYBE THIS CONFIRMS IT ALL.
Been reading about this contempt case for long and my question is why is DPP failing to act or what are judges scared of? is it they think what HH said doesn’t make a criminal offence or simply truth? Everytime I now see those Judges, my first mind is which ones are the corrupt 3 among them?
No matter how hotly this is debated the ball is in the Concourt’s court (pun intended) to either bring it to bear or not. What Muna Ndulo pointed out were issues regarding whether it was in keeping with the judicial codes of ethics for one Deputy CJ to comment on it the way he did. He cited some supporting precepts to back him up. Mwanza has done a very sorry job in his commentary however.
Ba Isaac Mwanza, you don’t do Law by correspondence through social media! Are you a Lawyer? If so, are you Professor of Law? If the answer to all the above is no, we don’t need to proceed. In Prof Ndulo’s submission, I don’t see where he has said HH did the right thing to lambast the judges! On the contrary, he hints that the deputy CJ has spoiled this case legally speaking! If I differ with Mr Isaac Mwanza today and Mr Mwanza has a relative who is a judge, it is wrong for Mr Mwanza’s relative who is a judge to get involved in our case as I won’t be guaranteed a fair trial!
I blame LT for entertaining this non-news worthy write up!
Mr Mwanza.I was so looking forward to your rebuttal of professor Ndulo’s discourse on aspect of jurisprudence.What with your earlier notable expose on individual rights to criticize legal judgments.
I must say,I am very disappointed.Where you rushed to respond?
No, he was not rushed to respond. This is the limit of his “intellectual” (LoL) capability
Both Ndulo and Mwanza are playing politics but I see the loser in all this: HH. This whole thing is stressing on his mind and its decampaigning him big time. I doubt HH will have the momentum to move on, especially if the ConCourt indicts him for contempt. That may be end of his political journey.
HH has big battles but am sad this is one of them. Hope he won’t be disqualified when he has criminal conviction. To my brother Ndulo, I say, well done in writing all that up but sounds like theories really and not practical. To Mwanza, I say this country closely follows your views but please dialogue with HH and let’s stop all this. I see lots of enmity between you and HH. He and his supporters hate u with passion but you do the same. You an authority in this country,though
Let there be healing.
Isaac has really given HH good run but this must serve as warning to HH to mind way he opens his mouth. Truly, this case is painting bad picture on HH and making him lose points among voters.
Appears HH is largely supported by his fellow Bantu Botatwe against whole country but this cloud hanging over his head is too big for him.
Where is Brig Gen Miyanda??He usually has better substance than this off the mark excuse of a script!
Some Chipata boys are plain $tup!d, slow to understand, plain vindictive! Ninshi tamulaba akantu? Echo Mushalika na Ba UNIPI! It is clear you got only the smoke and left the fire! Your blind hate for Mr HH blinds you to even see the sense in what the Professor Emeritus said! Just because of his ethnic extraction, you want to lower his professional standing? He did well to leave Zambia for the states! The Wise Men used to come from the eastern direction those days but there seems to be no wise men left in the East! Both HH and the Judges were wrong and we should not allow the two wrongs to make a right! Let’s instead talk about the slavery PF has brought on Zambians where we are being depleted everyday through Taxes and Fines!
VITAL FACTS OF LAW STUDENTS:
Law students at Unza, UNILUS and Zambia Open University may need to know that best academics in Law Faculties (Schools) are those who are known to practice in Courts of Law. In this regard my respect can only go to Prof. Mvula who has executed complex cases in High Courts of Zambia.
Prof. Ndulo has never defended a case in Courts. He is simply an arm-chair critic who develops lectures from past court cases – thanks to Google that provides rich sources of theoretical legal matters. As Dean in School of Law, he defended his deficiency by frustrating young Law Lectures that fled from Unza to South Africa. Besides, his PhD thesis dwelt on ZCCM Mines. Ndulo is free to parrot Trump’s sarcasm on Africans in US and Africa.
Without realizing, you have clearly stated shortcomings of Zambian legal profession.
Our “learned” professionals are “Jacks of all branches of Law, Experts of none”!!!
There are only two “branches” where theirs “intellect” comes on front:
(i) “creative” invoicing, and
(ii) “expertise” in “Legal Precedents” which are mostly irrelevant to the cause in front of the Bench
As to your “intellectual” (LoL) statement that “…Ndulo is free to parrot Trump’s sarcasm on Africans in US and Africa…”, may I ask you Mr. Smart Jack Ass, where was Trump when Prof Ndulo was ACTIVELY involved in creation of the Constitution of RSA and Republic of Kenya?
Do your self big favor, learn about objectivity instead of practicing politics of character assassination for the benefits…
… of your CORRUPT pay-master(s)!!!
It is LOCUS STANDI not LOCUS STANDING. Woke not Walk
Above comment was meant to give a comparison between the legal minds of Prof. Ndulo and Prof. Mvunga.
Prof. Ndulo has never defended a client in Zambian Courts – not even in a Local Court. Yet the intellectual prowess of Prof. Mvunga has been demonstrated by handling complex cases in Zambian High Courts.
Prof. Ndulo is no match fo the Kenyan Legal Scholar such as Prof Pactrick Lumumba. Ndulo is Trump’s stooge unable to comprehend the role that Brunthurst Foundation plays by coaching what Odinga, Maimane, HH and of late Chamisa must say when they lose elections.
And you are certified intellectual non-entity!!!
Do you “learned” (LoL) !mbecile know how to interpret Constitutional Law?
Leave HH alone all you PF cadres and most of you barely contribute to the national cake like HH does. Those judges are smart enough to know that listening to cadres is only going to bring trouble for them later on in the future when lungu and PF are gone. I hope the president is not listening to such advice because it’s only going to dent his image. Arresting someone for expressing themselves is nothing but foolishness, besides people have a right to make complaints against judges especially when you have spent colossal sum of money only for them to act foolish. The so called professor has spent zero in the so called case for him to even question someone who did.
Leave HH alone all you PF cadres and most of you barely contribute to the national cake like HH does. Those judges are smart enough to know that listening to cadres is only going to bring trouble for them later on in the future when lungu and PF are gone. I hope the president is not listening to such advice because it’s only going to dent his image. Arresting someone for expressing themselves is nothing but foolishness, besides people have a right to make complaints against judges especially when you have spent colossal sum of money only for them to act foolish. The so called professor has spent zero in the so called case for him to even question someone who did.
This professor Mwanza needs to STF, unless he spend any money on the useless court, otherwise as a citizen who has wasted money on the courts in Zed I would say I have every right to complain and call out our judges when they are not acting right. This is our country and definitely does not belong to PF and their minions alone. You can try and arrest HH, but how are you going to justify it because the so called professor seems to contradict himself when he says those judges are accountable to us, then why would you arrest someone for calling them out
The high office of the deputy chief justice seems to have passed judgement or guidance outside normal court proceedings. Would any judge assigned this case if it went to court ignore the DCJ remarks? Would they cite the remarks in their ruling? Will the judges give ruling freely after being publicly influenced by the DCJ?
Just because the case involves a politician who you love or hate should not blind us to the issues raised by the professor. Here is our learned DCJ joining public debate concerning court issues and giving his opinion or is it his judgement, is this normal. May I ask the DCJ to also give his opinion on the third term issue for ECL.
Honourable DCJ remember it has taken you many years of honest hard work for you to get to where you are now but it can take a minute or a…
Uhmmm! ba UPND supporters balishiba insele…!
even Isaac Mwanza has joined the debate just as Professor Ndulo joined. Mr Isaac Mwanza express your views and allow others to do so. hope you are not express your view because you hate Tongas……. Hope you not a tribalist obsessed with Eastern Power like some people we know
Prof. Handulo and Hansoni, friends of “Pro. HH” from the same clan. “Support your local team Badala!”