URGENT LETTER to the President of the Constitutional Court Regarding the Closure of the Court Registry on 24 August 2026
Joe Prince Makungu
Kitwe, Copperbelt Province, Zambia
Email: joeprince2027@gmail.com
27 August 2026
The President
Constitutional Court of Zambia
Plot No. 438, Independence Avenue
P.O. Box 50067
Lusaka, Zambia
Cc: The Chief Registrar
Constitutional Court of Zambia
Dear Madam President,
RE: URGENT REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CLARIFICATION ON THE CLOSURE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT REGISTRY ON 24 AUGUST 2026 AND ITS EFFECT ON ACCESS TO THE COURT AND THE EXERCISE OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PETITION
I write with utmost respect, but also with considerable urgency, concerning a matter that raises important questions regarding constitutional governance, access to justice, procedural fairness and public confidence in the administration of justice in Zambia.
The closure of the Constitutional Court Registry on Monday, 24 August 2026, being the final day of the constitutionally prescribed period for filing presidential election petitions, raises issues that extend beyond the interests of any particular litigant. The circumstances concern the practical ability of persons entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court to do so within the strict period prescribed by the Constitution of Zambia.
Article 103(1) of the Constitution of Zambia Act No. 2 of 2016 provides that a person may, within seven days of the declaration of a President-elect, petition the Constitutional Court to nullify the election of the President-elect on specified constitutional and electoral grounds. The availability of the Court’s filing process during that limited period is therefore of particular importance to the effective exercise of that constitutional entitlement.
The right to challenge the validity of a presidential election before the Constitutional Court is an important constitutional safeguard. It provides a mechanism through which electoral disputes may be subjected to judicial scrutiny and through which confidence in the integrity of the electoral process may be maintained.
Where the Constitution establishes a short and mandatory period within which such jurisdiction may be invoked, practical access to the Court’s filing processes assumes corresponding importance. The legal existence of a remedy is of limited practical value if a person who is otherwise ready and entitled to invoke that remedy cannot access the prescribed filing mechanism before the constitutional period expires.
It is my understanding that the Constitutional Court Registry was not open to receive filings on 24 August 2026 and that public communication concerning the position was issued only after the Registry had already closed or ceased receiving documents. If that understanding is correct, I respectfully request urgent administrative clarification on the following matters:
Matters Requiring Administrative Clarification
- Alternative filing arrangements: What administrative arrangements, if any, were put in place to enable prospective presidential election petitioners to lodge their petitions notwithstanding the closure of the Registry on 24 August 2026?
- Communication to prospective litigants: If an alternative filing mechanism was available, when was it established, through which official channels was it communicated, and at what time was that information made available to prospective litigants and members of the legal profession before the statutory filing deadline expired?
- Accessibility on the final day: If no alternative filing mechanism was available, what arrangements were made to ensure that persons who were otherwise ready and entitled to file a presidential election petition were not practically prevented from exercising the entitlement provided by Article 103(1) of the Constitution?
- Effect on a diligent prospective petitioner: Has the Court considered the procedural position or potential legal consequences for a person who, despite exercising reasonable diligence and being prepared to comply with all applicable filing requirements, was unable to lodge a petition solely because the Court Registry was inaccessible on the final day of the constitutionally prescribed filing period?
- Administrative responsibility and prejudice: Does the Court recognise and consider applicable the long-established common law principle, reflected in Commonwealth jurisprudence, that a litigant ought not to suffer prejudice occasioned solely by an act or omission of the Court or its administration?
If so, what administrative principles does the Court consider applicable where compliance with a mandatory filing deadline may have been prevented by the unavailability of the Court’s own filing facility or by an administrative circumstance attributable to the Court itself?
- Future safeguards: What measures, if any, does the Court intend to consider or implement to ensure that prospective litigants are not deprived of a practical opportunity to access the Registry on the final day of any constitutionally or statutorily prescribed filing period in the future?
These questions are raised not to interfere with, or seek judicial guidance concerning, the merits of any pending or contemplated litigation, but to obtain clarification regarding the administrative arrangements governing access to the Court during a constitutionally prescribed filing period.
I acknowledge that Madam President may be unable to comment on the merits of any pending proceedings and that it would be inappropriate for this correspondence to seek judicial guidance, legal advice, or a determination of any person’s legal rights. My request is therefore limited to administrative clarification concerning the availability of the Registry, any alternative filing arrangements that may have existed, the manner and timing of their communication and the safeguards applicable to persons affected by the Registry’s closure.
The circumstances are mostly important because presidential election petitions are subject to an exceptionally short constitutional filing period. Accordingly, where the filing facility of the Court was unavailable on the final day of that period, legitimate questions arise as to what practical arrangements existed to preserve access to the constitutional remedy for persons who wished to invoke it.
I respectfully submit that clarification on these matters would serve an important public interest. It would promote transparency, strengthen public confidence in the administration of justice, provide certainty to litigants and members of the legal profession, and help ensure that comparable circumstances in future do not inadvertently create uncertainty regarding access to constitutionally prescribed judicial remedies.
Given the constitutional importance and time-sensitive nature of these matters, I respectfully request that this letter receive urgent consideration and that a written response be provided at the Court’s earliest convenience.
Such clarification would be significant not only in relation to the circumstances of 24 August 2026, but also in establishing greater administrative certainty for future occasions when a constitutionally prescribed filing deadline falls on a day affected by an unexpected closure or disruption to normal Court operations. It would also reinforce the principle that constitutional rights should remain practically accessible even during extraordinary circumstances affecting the operations of the Court.
Please accept, Madam President, the assurances of my highest consideration. I have the honour to remain:
Yours faithfully,
Joe Prince Makungu (Mr.)
Concerned Zambian Citizen
Email: joeprince2027@gmail.com
Fair questions deserving honest answers.