
The ruling Patriotic Front (PF) has asked the Supreme Court to invoke section 104 of the Electoral Act number 12 of 2006, which bars any candidate found guilty of electoral malpractice from standing again for five years. In an appeal, the PF candidate’s lawyer Bonaventure Mutale said that the supreme court found that they were guilty of electoral malpractice.
“In this matter, we are asking the Supreme Court to give directions as how section 104 of the Electoral Act is to be applied, especially bearing in mind the fact that in its judgment nullifying the election, the Supreme Court had found that they had been guilty of electoral malpractice,” Mr Mutale said.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court nullified the election of Dr Kazonga and Mr Kakoma for electoral malpractice.
The former Vubwi MP, who also served as Agriculture Minister in the Rupiah Banda administration, is said to have given headmen in the constituency K20 million (old currency) each to attend his campaign meetings.
Mr Kakoma is said to have diverted hammer mills from Mwanse to Chinyingi in Zambezi, a move that could have influenced voters and disadvantaged the competition. The duo’s election was petitioned by PF’s Vincent Mwale (Vubwi) and Christabel Ngimu in Zambezi West.
“So we are to that extent asking the court to give directions to the ECZ [Electoral Commission of Zambia] as to how this issue should be dealt with. That is the purpose of this motion: to invoke provisions of the law to ensure that the two candidates in Vubwi and Zambezi West constituencies, whose election was nullified, are barred from standing for elections again,” Mr Mutale said.
In a notice of motion filed in the Supreme Court on Friday, Mr Mutale wants the court to determine whether, on a construction of sections 22 and 104 of the Electoral Act number 12 of 2006, read with section 9 of the Supreme Court Act, Chapter 25 of the Laws of Zambia and in view of the finding of the Supreme Court that Dr Kazonga is guilty of having committed corrupt practices in connection with Parliamentary elections held on 20th September 2011 in respect of Vubwi constituency.
“…it is incumbent on the High Court to make a report to the 2nd respondent (ECZ) and Director of Public Prosecutions on the finding that the first respondent (Dr Kazonga) committed corrupt practices in connection with the Parliamentary election…
“Whether the first respondent may contest any Parliamentary election in Zambia in the period of five years from the submission to the second respondent (ECZ) and the DPP of a report prepared by the High Court; and it is incumbent on the ECZ or the National Prosecutions Authority to prosecute the first respondent (Dr Kazonga) for corrupt practices under the Electoral Act.”
And in his affidavit in support of the notice of motion, Mr Mutale says: “It is unclear whether the first respondent (Dr Kazonga) is eligible to contest any election held in the next five years, or whether the High Court, the second respondent (ECZ), the DPP, and/or the National Prosecutions Authorities must take any steps in view of the finding by this Honourable Court that the first respondent is guilty of having committed corrupt practices in connection with the election.”