Minister of Justice, George Kunda, says proposed measures in the private Judicial Code of Conduct (Amendment) Bill are unprecedented in the entire Commonwealth and are a serious threat to the independence of the judiciary.
This is according to the report of the Committee on Delegated Legislation tabled in Parliament last week.
Mr Kunda said in his submissions to a private member’s bill sponsored by Kabwata member of Parliament, Given Lubinda.
“This Bill is the only one of its kind in the Commonwealth.
The proposed amendments in relation to officers in the judiciary could be easily manipulated and used to scandalise judicial officers whose private and personal affairs would be exposed in the public domain.
With this kind of possible abuse, the judiciary as an institution can be destroyed,†Mr Kunda said.
The bill seeks to compel judicial officers (Supreme Court and High Court Judges, Industrial Relations Court chairpersons, Magistrates, and Local Court justices, etc.) to declare income, assets and liabilities annually with the Judicial Complaints Authority.
The bill, which also seeks to criminalise failure to file such declarations and filing false or misleading declarations, was however deferred last week alongside the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Amendment Bill after Parliament granted Mr Lubinda leave to defer the bills
Mr Kunda argued that the proposed amendments in relation to the judiciary negated the whole idea of the independence of the judiciary, tenure and security of office, and did not exist anywhere in the democratic world.
“With regard to judges, the intended amendment is unconstitutional for attempting to provide a backdoor amendment to the constitution by inclusion of an additional ground on which a judge may be removed from office, thereby posing a great risk to the security of tenure.
“Judges are not politicians, nor are they elected and are not allowed to issue press statements by virtue of their Code of Conduct.
Thus, judges will be prejudiced and their rights violated when attacked as a result of the public disclosure of their incomes, assets and liabilities as they will not respond to such attacks in public,†he said.
Mr Kunda said a heavy burden would be placed on judicial officers regarding the valuation of their assets, as they would be required to value them annually if they were to file accurate declarations in view of the criminalisation attached to filing declarations.
He said the bill was a threat to those wishing to join the Bench from the private sector where that kind of intrusion into their private affairs did not exist.
Mr Kunda said the bill was not in the interest of the nation as it was not consistent with the constitution and Judicial (Code of Conduct) Act.
“If the proposed amendments are allowed, the possibility of conflict and industrial unrest and a possible constitutional crisis can not be ruled out, as the judicial officers are strongly opposed to these amendments,†he said.
And other stakeholders opposed to the bill submitted that it was unfair, oppressive and sent out wrong signals as it singled out judicial officers from other public servants as a cadre requiring public scrutiny of their personal lives.
The stakeholders, who included Judicial Service Commission and Magistrates Association of Zambia, said the bill detracted from the concept of judicial officers and strengthened the perception that judicial officers were corrupt and should always be checked.
“The bill does not recognise that judicial officers, especially in the lower courts, have continually served under poverty and very embarrassing conditions.
The new law will only expose the embarrassing poverty of judicial officers, especially at magistrate and local court justice levels,†the submissions read in part.
Meanwhile, on the ACC Amendment Bill, Mr Kunda said Mr Lubinda did not consult the Ministry of Justice.
The bill seeks to provide for senior public officers to submit to the Chief Justice an annual declaration of assets, income and liabilities; and for the senior public officers to declare interest in a contract made or proposed to be made by Government.
Mr Kunda said the Kabwata MP was vague on the category of public officers to be affected by the amendment.
“Since the Bill is intended to cover parastatals, public institutions or corporate bodies in which Government has an interest, it is not sufficient merely to categorise such senior public officers from the rank of director and above,†he said.
Mr Kunda wondered why the amendment should leave out accountants, procurement officers and senior personnel handling financial affairs.
He also asked if the need to file declarations also intended to cover the military, intelligence, and police officers.
“Officers in these sensitive institutions should not be exposed to this kind of scrutiny if the country has to effectively maintain security, law and order.
Any intrusion into the private affairs of such officers may undermine public security,†he said.
Mr Kunda concluded that Mr Lubinda did not do sufficient research and consultations and that passing such types of bills would create problems and might be counter productive.
“The above concerns, therefore, have to be addressed by the mover (Mr Lubinda) if the Bills have to proceed any further,†he said.
 Daily-Mail
