Ministry of Justice, Sebastian Zulu yesterday said the granting of the stay on President Micheal Sata’s suspension of Justices Philip Musonda, Charles Kajimanda and Nigel Mutuna showed that the Judiciary was panicking.

And Zulu has ordered Solicitor General Musa Mwenye to immediately apply to the High Court to have the stay of execution of the tribunal revoked.

Lusaka High Court Judge Flugence Chisanga on May 16,2012 stayed proceedings of a Tribunal appointed by President Sata to investigate the misconduct of a supreme Court Judge and two High Court Judges after arguments that it was illegal and premature.

In an Interview shortly after the state received the order served on the Attorney General , Zulu said he surprised by the development because it was unlawful and in contravention of the State proceedings act.

The matter has been instituted by High Court Judge Nigal Mutuna and Judge Kajimanga who are contesting the legality of their suspension as Judges last month and subsequent setting up of a tribunal to probe their alleged misconduct.

” I have ordered the solicitor General to immediately have that stay revoked on the ground that under section 16 of the state proceedings Act. An Injunction may not be granted against the state,”he said.

“An Order of stay is in fact a mandatory injunction which is ordering that the tribunal should not take off, that is what the law does not allow. It (law) doesn’t allow such an order as far as I an concerned.”

Zulu Said he was shocked at the order passed by the judge,in which the reinstating of two involved parties as judges has also been ordered,stressing that it was clear that the judiciary were panicking.

Hearing in matter has been set for May 30,2012

[Statehouse Website]

A -22-year woman of Kabwe who was arrested for injuring another woman’s private parts on allegations that the victim was flirting with her husband has pleaded not guilty to the charge of assault.

Easter Banda of Kawama township is allegedly to have assaulted Beauty Phiri thereby causing her bodily harm contrary to section 248 of Cap 87 of the Laws of Zambia.

Particulars of the offence are that on January31, 2012, the accused person did attack the complaint as she was going home. The victim was waylaid dragged into the nearby bush were she was beaten and in the process, the assiallant scratched her private parts with her fingers on suspicion that she was going out with a married man.

But Mrs Banda denied the charge before magistrate Temwaninge M’hango.

State prosecutor Lydia Nyoka applied for an adjournment to June6, 2011 for commencement of trial.

Meanwhile a 25 year old kabwe man has been sentenced to six months imprisonment with hard labour after he pleaded guilty to the charge of being in possession of 0.3 grammes of marijuana,a prohibited substance in Zambia.

In passing the sentencing, Magistrate M’hango said it was saddening that people have continue to engage themselves in such acts despite the serious nature of the crime.

In reading the facts State prosecutor Yvonne Sakala said the convict was found in possession with psychotropic substances contrary to section (8) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act chapter 96 of the Laws of Zambia.

Mrs Sakala told the court that, on April30, 2012, the convict did posses in psychotropic substances namely 0.3 grammes of marijuana a herbal of cannabis sativa unlawfully.

But in mitigation the convict asked for forgivness saying his wife was pregnant and that if sent to jail his wife would suffer considering that both of his parents are dead.

But Magistrate M’hango said she was exercising leniency by sentencing him for six months imprisonment with hard labour saying the crime committed was serious that it should as warning to other would be offenders.

Two of the three suspended judges have obtained a stay to prevent the tribunal from sitting to hear their alleged impropriety pending the full determination of the matter by the High Court.

This is in a case in which Judges Nigel Mutuna and Charles Kajimanga have taken the Attorney General to Court asking it to quash President Michael Sata’s decision to constitute a tribunal to conduct investigations of their alleged misbehaviour or incompetence.

President Michael Sata on April 30th suspended Justices Philip Musonda, Charles Kajimanga and Nigel Mutuna and appointed a tribunal headed by Justice Lovemore Chipoka of the Malawi High Court to investigate the alleged misbehavior of the three Judges.The terms of reference of the tribunal were to be based on the allegations that the trio interfered with a case involving the Post newspapers, Development Bank of Zambia (DBZ and JNC holding limited and Mutembo Nchito.

High Court Judge, Fulgency Chisanga, in her ruling granted the duo leave to apply for judicial leave which would operate as a stay of Mr Sata’s decision to appoint a tribunal and suspend the judges and any adverse measures against the applicants.

“Upon hearing counsel for the applicants and reading the affidavits of Judges Mutuna and Kajimanga respectively, it is hereby ordered that the applicants be and are hereby granted leave to apply for judicial review.

“And it is further ordered that the leave so granted shall operate as a stay of the decisions of his Excellency the President to appoint a tribunal, to suspend the applicants and any adverse measures against the applicants in relation to the performance of their Constitutional duties as duly appointed Puisne Judges pending determination of this matter or further direction by this court,” Judge Chisanga said.

The applicants, through their lawyers from Eric Silwamba and Company and Shamwana and Company alleged that it was incompetent to appoint a tribunal to investigate a Puisne Judge regarding a judgment delivered in a civil case when an appeal was pending in the Supreme Court.

They claimed that they would demonstrate that the action taken by the President was unreasonable.

The applicants in their originating notice of Order 53 of the 1965 Rules of the Supreme Court 1965 (White Book) stated that the President’s decision to appoint a tribunal was illegal, premature and consequently null and void as his powers were premised on Article 98 (2), (30) and (5) of the Constitution.

They also contended that Mr Sata erred in Law and usurped the Statutory Powers of the Judicial Complaints Authority and those of the Chief Justice when he purported to assert the role of an investigator on complaints against the duo who were judicial officers because that was the preserve of the Judicial Complaints Authority.

“His Excellency also erred in Law and usurped the Constitutional functions of the Supreme Court when he appointed a tribunal to investigate them when the appeal in the said case is effectively subjudice,” the lawyers said.

They said the decision to appoint a tribunal to investigate the applicants and suspending them respectively was premised on improper motive and characterised by political consideration and actual bias without proper investigations but anchored on unsubstantiated reports by people enjoying particular relationships with the President.

And Judge Kajimanga, in his affidavit stated that he received his suspension letter on April 30 this year without indicating reasons and yet during a press conference on the same day the President made public allegations that he interfered with the retrieving of alleged cases from their fellow judge, Albert Wood and misbehaved jointly with Justice Phillip Musonda and acted incompetently.

“That at no material times had the allegations against me ever been lodged or made known to the Judicial Complaints Authority as prescribed by the Constitution as read together with the Code of Conduct. I am advised by my counsel that the President prematurely invoked the provisions of the Constitution by establishing the tribunal as the complaints authority of first instance,” Judge Kajimanga said.

And Judge Mutuna, in his affidavit also stated that he was not given any reasons for his suspension and that the action was premature and against the Law.

Judge Mutuna invited the Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to review the whole court record in the Supreme Court where a notice of appeal had been duly filed.

The matter has been set for May 30, 2012 for hearing of the judicial review.

The Jesuit Center for Theological Reflection (JCTR) has demanded an explanation from government over its u-turn on the re-introduction of windfall tax.

The JCTR said that government should publicize its reasons for not re-introducing the windfall tax regime for the mines a u-turn on its campaign promises.

JCTR programmes manager for economic equity and development, Geoffrey Chongo said that it was unfortunate that the Patriotic Front government has Lost a golden opportunity to re-introduce windfall taxes because mining Companies after the PF’s victory, were ready to start submitting.

Mr.Chongo said that JCTR feels let down by the fact that the PF government has suddenly gone soft on windfall tax without offering a concrete explanation to the masses that voted them into office.

He said that JCTR was not against the government u-turning on its campaign promise to re-introduce windfall tax, but wants an explanation.

Speaking at a media workshop in Lusaka today, Mr. Chongo said that it was also unfortunate to realize how little the mining sector contributes to the country’s tax revenue considering how important the sector is to the country’s economy.

He said that there was still need for government and investors in the mining sector to strike a balance in sharing profits from the mines.

QFM