DEFENCE LAWYERS QUESTIONS SEAN TEAMBO’S PRESENCE AT THE BAR WITHOUT DPP CONSCENT IN THE LUCIFER CASE

DEFENCE LAWYERS QUESTIONS SEAN TEAMBO’S PRESENCE AT THE BAR WITHOUT DPP CONSCENT IN THE LUCIFER CASE

March 04, 2024

Lusaka MAGISTRAGE Nsunge Chanda has reserved ruling to 18th March 2024 in a matter in which UPND Secretary General, Batuke IMENDA has been sued by Patriots for Economic Progress, Sean Tembo for alleged labeling Lusaka Diocese Archbishop Alick Banda as Lucifer.

The defence team led by Larry Njungu of Mutemwa Chambers challenged the presence of the plaintif Sean Tembo at the bar in the absence of express permission from the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) allowing him to function as a Private Prosecutor.

Counsel Njungu submitted that it was illegal and without statutory basis for Mr Tembo to sit at the bar when the DPP had not provided any guidance to that effect and was therefore in a wrong place.

“Mr Tembo is blind in so far as the law is concerned, and it’s wrong for him to suggest to this honourable court that we are appealing against the ruling of 2nd February 2024 through the back door,” Mr Njungu said.

Another defence lawyer McQueen Zaza of Ilunga and Company submitted that the bar is a pure sanctuary for legal practitioners and others permitted to sit thereon by the DPP.

Counsel Zaza submitted that Article 180, Clause 8 of the Constitution of Zambia is explicitly clear saying “The functions of the Director of Public Prosecution may be exercised in person or by a public officer or legal practitioner, authorised by the Director of Public Prosecution, acting under the general or special instructions of the Director of Public Prosecution.”

“Is Sean Tembo a legal practitioner, no; he is an Accountant. But can an individual who is not a legal practitioner prosecute a criminal matter without the permission of the DPP?” said Mr Zaza.

He said, even if Mr Tembo was allowed to function as a Private Prosecutor, he could only function as a Co-Prosecutor to the DPP or the lead Public Prosecutor as provided for under the laws of Zambia.

He further submitted that Article 128, Clause 2 of the Constitution of Zambia demands that any matter with glitches on the Constitution, should be determined by the Constitution Court.

He maintained that in the absence of authority or permission from the Office of the DPP, Mr Tembo cannot prosecute the matter, and allowing him to do so would be a violation of the Constitution of Zambia.

In his argument, Mr Tembo said the application by the defense wasn’t new and as such it was frivolous and lacked merit adding that the defence was wasting the courts time as the matter was previously raised on 22nd January 2024 and the court rendered a ruling on 8th February 2024.

He added that he was sitting at the Bar at the convenience of the court, but the defence lawyers watered down his argument indicating that the court is about laws and not conveniences.

Mr Tembo who had on two occassions sat in the public gallery said he was ready to sit anywhere in court to make the defence lawyers happy.

But in response, defence counsel Timmy Munalula of Mulungoti and Company submitted that the defense would seek the Constitution Court’s determination on the legality of the proceeding and that the accused person can be sitted in the accused doc in the absence of authority from the DPP to prosecute the matter by way of a Private Prosecutor.

“The Constitution Court enjoins this honourable court to stand down when dealing with a matter that borders on the constitution. It’s also the discretion of this court to look at the Constitution part of this matter,” said Mr Munalula.

Magistrate Chanda has reserved ruling to 18th March 2024.

Mr. Tembo is in this matter representing himself and has since applied to the DPP to privately prosecute the matter, a request the DPP has rejected.

(C) UPND MEDIA TEAM