Court dismisses Mundubile’s petition against Speaker
THE Lusaka High Court has dismissed Brian Mundubile’s application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings against speaker of the national Assembly Nelly Mutti for supplanting supplanting him as leader of the opposition in parliament.
High Court judge Geoffrey Mulenga has ruled that according to the amended constitution of 2016 the High Court’s powers have been limited to determine issues bordering on constitutional breaches by public authorities.
He said he will be usurping powers of the Constitutional Court as the original and final arbiter in constitutional matters.
The Mporokoso member of parliament protested Mutti’s decision to alter the seating position by replacing him as the leader of the opposition with his Mafinga counterpart, Robert Chabinga.
He said Mutti’s actions were procedurally improper and irrational when she acted on a request by PF Secretary General Morgan Ng’ona to have him replaced on reasons that he had effected changes on the list of office bearers of the party at the National Assembly.
Mundubile said Secretary General of the Edgar Lungu group Raphael Nakacinda wrote to Mutti informing her that no changes had been made yet she went ahead and pronounced that the office bearers of PF had been changed according to a search conducted by the National Assembly at the Registrar of Societies.
He sought a declaration that the information given by the speaker on November 1, 2023 that the office bearers of PF were changed at the Registrar of Societies is and was incorrect.
Mundubile wanted the Court to pronounce that the decision by the speaker to replace him with Chabinga was elligal, null and void.
He further sought an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the speaker.
Ruling on the application judge Mulenga directed that Mundubile should seek redress from the Constitutional Court if he feels the Speaker has breached the law.
“I find that this Court does not have the jurisdiction to hear and determine this application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings on reasons that the action is concerned with the interpretation of Article 74(2) which is a preserve of the Constitutional Court,”judge Mulenga said.
He further guided that the matter cannot be refered to the correct Court owing to the wrong mode of commencement.
By Mwaka Ndawa
Kalemba