COURT UPDATE: SEAN TEMBO VS ATTORNEY GENERAL

COURT UPDATE: SEAN TEMBO VS ATTORNEY GENERAL – 2023CCZ0026

Lusaka, 11th June 2024

The matter in which Party President for the Patriots for Economic Progress (PeP) sued President Hakainde Hichilema, through the Attorney General, in the Constitutional Court of Zambia, for Mr. Hichilema’s consistent and continous use of insulting language, came up for a hearing before a full bench of the Constitutional Court this morning.

In this matter, the Petitioner Mr. Sean Tembo is seeking a declaration from the Court that President Hakainde Hichilema’s use of insulting language contravenes articles 91(3)a, 91(3)d, 91(3)f, 92(1) and 173(1)a of the Republican Constitution, which requires a Republican President to conduct himself with dignity and integrity.

In an attempt to prove his case, the Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo submitted several pieces of evidence before Court, which include audio-video recordings in which President Hakainde Hichilema is captured using insulting language including the word “Chikala” , referring to his Predecessor Former President Edgar Lungu as a “Stupid Man”, using the word “ukuponoka ” which means pulling the foreskin of a penis backwards, etcetera. The Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo has argued in his Petition that the behavior of President Hakainde Hichilema thus far is not presidential and lacks dignity and integrity.

The matter was filed by the Petitioner on 30th November 2023. However, before the matter could proceed to trial,the Attorney General raised a Preliminary Issue on 2nd February 2024, in which he was seeking to have the matter dismissed without being heard on its merits by the Court. The matter came up this morning for the parties to make verbal submissions to augment the written submissions that had already been filed by both parties, regarding the Preliminary Issue that had been raised by the Attorney General.

When the matter came up this morning, the Attorney General, through one of his Counsel, made an application to have the matter adjourned to a later day. This application to adjourn was made on the basis that the Attorney General wanted to have the Solicitor General; Mr. Marshal Muchende SC as one of the Counsel to make submissions before Court, and that Mr. Marshal Muchende was held up this morning as he was chairing a very important meeting.

The Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo vehemently opposed the application to adjourn by the Attorney General. He argued that the main Counsel from the Attorney General’s Chambers who had been seized with conduct of the matter since inception, was before Court, and that any adjournment would be a waste of precious judicial resources. The Court ruled in favor of the Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo, and the application by the Attorney General to adjourn the matter was dismissed. The Court then proceeded to hear the substantive verbal submissions from the parties, regarding the Preliminary Issue which the Attorney General had raised regarding the Petition.

The Attorney General argued that the Petition should be dismissed because it was frivolous and vexatious and also because it allegedly did not disclose a cause of action nor the provisions of the Constitution that had been contravened. The Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo argued that in a Constitutional matter, the cause of action arises when there is an alleged contravention of the Constitution, and that the Petition has clearly outlined the specific provisions of the Constitution which have allegedly been contravened due to President Hakainde Hichilema’s use of insulting language, these being articles 91(3)a, 91(3)d, 91(3)f, 92(1) and 173(1) of the Republican Constitution.

The Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo further submitted that the Attorney General’s Preliminary Issue hinges on the same arguments that he had made in the main matter in his Affidavit in Opposition and List of Authorities and Skeleton Arguments in Opposition, and that the Preliminary Issue cannot be determined by the Court, without indirectly determining the main matter. In other words, the Attorney General was trying to compel the Court to determine the main matter using the back door, by pretending that it was a preliminary issue, thereby denying the Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo the opportunity to adduce evidence to support his case, and also denying the Court the opportunity to interrogate that evidence and arrive at an appropriate judgement, after full consideration of the totality of the case.

The Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo requested the Court to dismiss the Attorney General’s Preliminary issues for being frivolous and lacking merit. The Court adjourned for 10 minutes, and when it reconvened, it rendered it’s ruling which was delivered by Judge Munsaluke. The Court dismissed the Attorney General’s Preliminary Issues for lack of merit. The Petitioner Mr Sean Tembo is representing himself in this matter.

///END