By C. Ngoma

President Banda does not have the advantage of the late President Mwanawasa who was “legally savvy”. I believe it was a mistake to appoint Rt Hon Kunda SC as Vice President AND Justice Minister. I wonder whether he is not calling the shots and giving the President un-challenged legal advice.
I say this because, by its very nature, law is adversarial and to every legal opinion there is a counter-argument. Lawyers do not really seek the truth but ‘law.’ Therefore, it is possible to do something unethical and yet legal. Whoever was responsible for the decision not to appeal against the Chiluba judgement did nothing illegal, but it was immoral and highly unethical. Justice MUST be seen to be done.
A lawyer may know that his client did commit the crime, but he has every right to challenge the validity of ‘the evidence’ because the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt. To lay-people like me, this would be immoral, but not to lawyers! However, we have brought this upon ourselves because we want to live by the letter of the law. The law is cold and unfeeling.
In many cases, we apply to the human heart for empathy in order to get mercy. Justice and mercy do not go together. This is why the Christian message hinges on the doctrine of atonement where the blows of justice were parried as it were by the Son of God, so that ‘by His stripes we are healed and the chastisement that brought us peace fell upon Him.’ We have ALL at one time or another needed mercy and not justice: at a police road block with a defective tyre in hard economic times, on a long queue when we are in a hurry and ‘first come first served’ will not do, and myriads of mitigating situations in every court of law!
Why am I saying all this? I believe that if the President’s closest confidante is a lawyer, he will almost always come up with very tricky decisions. To a lay-person, some issues may be simply black and white, but to legal minds, there are almost endless possibilities and arguments that can extend the degrees of freedom of actions but still remain within the boundaries of legality. You may call them loop-holes if you want.
The Vice President is a former Attorney General and what qualified him for that office has not been taken away from him, and he remains in the Justice ministry. Could it be that, being such a senior lawyer, the younger and less experienced feel intimidated and are likely to take HIS opinion than form their own? Could it be that he finds himself confused as to which hat he should be wearing?
I suppose a junior surgeon may feel daunted to operate on a seasoned surgeon as his patient, and yet medicine is more factual and evidence based than law. For the DPP to really work independently, Rt Hon. George Kunda should not be Justice minister or else another, more senior person should take the role of DPP. I could be mistaken, but the events that have unfolded so far do suggest that the DPP did not make decisions independently, and if he did, he should come out and say so to his legal licensing authority, the Law Association of Zambia to whom he is answerable as a legal practitioner, rather than let politicians speak on his behalf. In the medical field, it would be wrong for a politician to defend a doctor charged with malpractice by the Medical Council of Zambia! Or has judgment fled to brutish beasts and men lost their reasoning?