Court Upholds Jurisdiction Hearing In MUNDUBILE, ZULU case
By Hector Simfukwe
Director of Public Prosecutions GILBERT PHIRI has opposed an application by Tonse Alliance Leader BRIAN MUNDUBILE and his running mate MAKEBI ZULU to give oral evidence challenging the jurisdiction of the Solwezi Court to hear their sedition case.
Mr. PHIRI says the State does not dispute the contents of the warn and caution statements, which indicate that the alleged offence was committed in Lusaka.
He, however, argued that the application should be dismissed because it is not supported by law and the issues the accused seek to raise through oral evidence are already covered in documents before the court.
Earlier, Defence Lawyer BONAVENTURE MUTALE applied to challenge the court’s jurisdiction, arguing that the alleged offence was committed in Lusaka and not Solwezi.
The Defence later asked the court to allow the accused to give oral evidence on the matter, citing the contents of their warn and caution statements.
But Solwezi Principal Resident Magistrate MAMBWE MUKONDE dismissed the application, saying the issues raised in the oral submissions were already adequately addressed in the documents before the court.
Magistrate MUKONDE noted that the State had not disputed the contents of the warn and caution statements or the fact that the alleged offence was committed in Lusaka.
Meanwhile, Mr. PHIRI has assured the Defence that better arrangements will be made to facilitate easier access to the court for lawyers.
He said although police officers have a duty to provide security at the court premises, security measures should not interfere with lawyers’ access to their clients or prevent private consultations.
Mr. PHIRI was responding to complaints from the Defence that lawyers were having difficulties accessing the courtroom and were not being allowed privacy when consulting their clients.
In her ruling, Magistrate MUKONDE directed the State to ensure that Defence lawyers have easy access to the court and are allowed to hold private conversations with their clients.
She said this should be done while taking into account the heightened public interest in the matter and the need to maintain security at the court premises.