By McDonald Chipenzi
Following the ConCourt Judgement upholding the nullification of the Kabushi election, many are asking whether Bowman Lusambo qualified to recontest his seat in the coming by-election.
Section 108(6) demands that where it appears to High Court [in this case ConCourt] upon a trial of an election that any corrupt practice or illegal practice has been committed by any person in connection with the election to which the election relates… in the event that there is an appeal, the ConCourt shall prepare the report, except that the Court shall not state the name of any person under this paragraph unless the person has been given an opportunity of appearing before the Court and of showing cause why that person’s name should not be so stated.
However, Subsection 7 guides that the Registrar or designated person shall deliver a copy of every report prepared by the High Court [in this case ConCourt] to the Commission; and the Director of Public Prosecution [DPP]
Further, Subsection 8 mandates the Commission, as soon as it receives the report under subsection 7, recommend the prosecution of the person stated in the report by the DPP.
In the case of Bowman Lusambo, the ConCourt has established fraud and violence, which are illegal practice in the Electoral process and prosecutable.
This perfectly attracts prosecution of Bowman and his NATO troops.
Therefore, police and ACC must move in to prosecute the culprits to send a strong storm to those involved and mentioned in the High Court report.
However, the court seems not to have disqualified Bowman from recontesting this fresh election for Kabushi Seat.
What the court has done basically, is nullifying the election that brought his “victory” for being marred with fraud and illegal practice hence being an unfair therefore, calling for fresh election through a by-election in Kabushi.
Unless prosecution for illegal practice among practices established of Bowman starts now, he is free and qualified to recontest the Kabushi Seat.
I submit
