Court throws out Changala’s application to subpoena Hichilema
THE Lusaka magistrates court has ruled that Brebner Changala has not described the type of evidence that he wants President Hakainde Hichilema, senior government and UPND officials among others; to produce in his seditious case.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/GWfhd8LBmAKUKTsi/
Lusaka chief resident magistrate Davies Chibwili said if Changala’s intended witnesses had documents in their possession or power, he was supposed to specify or sufficiently describe them in his summons.
Changala had asked the Court to subpoena President Hichilema, senior UPND officials, leaders of opposition parties, Academicians, and police officers among others to testify and produce evidence in his seditious case that will prove him innocent.
Changala said he could not proceed with his defense without conducting a pre-trial with his intended witnesses, hence the Court should summon them on his behalf so that they can aid his defense.
Ruling on the case, magistrate Chibwili said the affidavit in support of application has not specified nor described any evidence or documents that are in the possesion or control of the intended witnesses which will assist the case.
“The applicant has merely submitted a list of names without indicating what evidence he hoped to get from each of those individuals on that list, which will assist his defence,” magistrate Chibwili said.
“It was not sufficient for the defence to only submit a list of names of their potential witnesses. They were required by section 143 to make it appear to the court that the material evidence can be given by or was in the possesion of those individuals.”
He said Changala should have specified the documents in the summons.
“If, for arguments sake, the court was inclined to summon the Republican President as prayed by the defence, was he expected to come with the whole presidential library to court ? The same applies to all those on the list,” magistrate Chibwili said.
“Section 143 of the Criminal Procedure Code states that the documents or writings must be specified or otherwise sufficiently described in the summons.The defence have not done so nor attempted to do so. It follows that their application to subpoena witnesses can therefore not succeed. It is dismissed forth with.”
Magistrate Chibwili further ordered that Changala should be the first one to open his defense, before his intended witnesses.
By Mwaka Ndawa
Kalemba October 18, 2024.