EDGAR LUNGU TAKES COMPLAINT AGAINST 3 CONCOURT JUDGES TO JCC, REQUEST THEIR IMMEDIATE RECUSAL
Lusaka -Thursday, 26th September, 2024
Zambia’s Sixth President, Dr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu has filed a complaint against 3 Constitutional Court Judges hearing his matter for their possible bias towards his case.
In his letter dated 25th September 2024, the former President complained that Constitutional Court President Justice Prof.Margaret Munalula, Justice Arnold Mweetwa Shilimi and Justice Maria Mapani-Kawimbe, should have voluntarily requested to recused themselves from the case owing to strong reasons and their close relationship to President Hakainde Hichilema.
President Hichilema has repeatedly and publicly stated that he will not allow his predecessor to be on the ballot.
Members of the UPND have since filed various legal cases including this one, to have his eligibility to participate in presidential elections.
President Lungu says he was surprised that in the case of the recently suspended judges (Justice Palan Mulonda, Justice Anne Sitali and Justice Mugeni Mulenga), Justice Prof. Margaret Mudenda Munalula.
He wondered if she was being spared because she passed a minority judgment in the said 2016 election petition, whose ruling inherently favoured President Hichilema.
He also stated that Justice Shilimi was a known buainess associate of President Hichilema and has sat on companies as company secretay associated with President Hichilema. Justice Mapani is a close relative of President Hichilema.
President Lungu has requested that the 3 judges recuse themselves in the eligibility case, in whose coming election President Hichilema is expected to participate in.
When you use the flesh to fight your battle, you will fail.
Who ever diggeth a pit shall fall in it…..on a slippery slope now
Trying to create a constitutional crisis.
Raise the pangas to elect the president – pangas’ raised. going going a nonentity dribbles the king and scores to become king.
The is from an article by Sishuwa in the Lusaka time and he quotes the act.
“To be clear, the suspension and removal of a judge is provided for in Articles 143 and 144 of Zambia’s constitution, as shown below.
143. A judge shall be removed from office on the following grounds:
(a) a mental or physical disability that makes the judge incapable of performing judicial functions;
(b) incompetence;
(c) gross misconduct; or (d) bankruptcy.
144. (1) The removal of a judge may be initiated by the Judicial Complaints Commission or by a complaint made to the Judicial Complaints Commission, based on the grounds specified in Article 143.
(2) The Judicial Complaints Commission shall, where it decides that a prima facie case has been established against a judge, submit a report to the President.
(3) The President shall, within seven days from the date of receiving the report, submitted in accordance with clause (2), suspend the judge from office and inform the Judicial Complaints Commission of the suspension.
(4) The Judicial Complaints Commission shall, within thirty days of the judge being suspended from office, in accordance with
(5) Where the Judicial Complaints Commission decides that an allegation based on a ground specified in Article 143(b), (c) and (d) is —
(a) not substantiated, the Judicial Complaints Commission shall recommend, to the President, the revocation of the judge’s suspension and the President shall immediately revoke the suspension; or
(b) substantiated, the Judicial Complaints Commission shall recommend, to the President, the removal of the judge from office and the President shall immediately remove the judge from office.
(6) The proceedings under clause (4) (a) shall be held in camera and the judge is entitled to appear, be heard and be represented by a legal practitioner or other person chosen by the judge.
These three Judges have only been suspended and are yet to appear before the JCC. Isnt the JCC and the President only following the provisions of the law?
Yes, Gunner of Zambia raises an interesting point about the three Judges; if the have previously had Compliants against them made at the JCC. Why didnt the JCC suspend them? What is so different now?
Unfortunately, the hearing and their defence will be in camera but this is a matter of Public interest and the public has a right to know as well as understand the issues that affect them.
Wish someone can apply that the matter be made public and not in camera. That way we understand the basis n which the JCC will arrive at their decision.
I do however, note Lungu’s concern; though wrongly submitted. But wonder why is interest in having these three judges in particular be a part of those who should preside on the matter in which he is a respondent. We dont get to pick the judges we want? Why should he?
How are Judges appointed to the bench? I thought the Judical service commission recommends to the President. Then why do people want to give the impression that they are hand picked by the President?
Those who crafted the current law which the JCC had adopted to use to address the current situation can not stand and speak out against the same laws which the advocated for. Morally it is not right. Just because it does not favor them now is not a valid reason for them to attack the persons using their legally enacted wisdom into action.
Who did they create this piece of legislation for? Certainly the law must apply to all of us equally.
In my opinion those who crafted this law into existence should celebrate that their intentions are now seeing the day of light in court despite the fact that it is not in their favor or best interest.
If this is the only law available thanks to the crafters , we have no other alternative to deal with issues of this nature apart from what we have now. If you don’t like it then change the law. It does not help to walk back on what has already been endorsed by the politicians themselves.
This is chasing after the wind.
It was a travesty that Zambia was ruled by such low-level and shameless criminal who was nothing until Sata thinkng he was a humble man and appointed him to be a Minister, acting president and Minister of Justice. You can’t understand what was wrong with Sata and his affinity for Lawyers. First it was the liking of Kabimba, Lungu, Chenda and then Sangwa! These are all lawyers by profession if I am not mistaken.