Sinkamba Peter
JCC ADJOURNS DPP HEARING TO SEPTEMBER 2, 2022
THE matter involving the Director of Public Prosecutions Lillian Siyunyi’s appearance before the Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) was adjourned to 2nd September 2022 after she demanded that her response will be in writing.
Ms Siyunyi and the JCC have been going back and forth as she demanded certain issues that failed to materialise including wanting to be represented by the Attorney General at JCC, and seeking President Hakainde Hichilema to lift her oath of secrecy for her to divulge certain information.
However Attorney General Mulilo Kabesha rejected both requests and guided the DPP to go ahead and answer complaints levelled against her at JCC. This time around, Ms Siyunui has told the Vincent Malambo chaired JCC that she wants to respond to all complaints levelled against her in writing. In this regard, the commission has adjourn the matter to September 2, 2022.
As I indicated several times, there was absolutely no need for the DPP to waste time through legal gymnastics as the Constitution, and the Judicial Complaints Act, provide sufficient protection to witnesses that divulge confidential information to lawfully constituted tribunals like JCC so long as the information is provided on oath and truthful.
One would assume that as a senior lawyer, Ms Siyuni knows or ought to have known about this. The procrastination was really a waste of time as she was pushing an open door.
Let the hearings at JCC finally commence.
Meanwhile, the President should invoke Article 181 of the Constitution to suspend the Ms Siyuni from performing functions of the DPP until the determination by JCC and the Constitutional Court, of the legality, and constutionality, of the indemnity agreement that she entered into with the former KCM Provisional Liquidator Milingo Lungu. For, it is not in the best interest of the public for Ms Siyuni to be a State witness in the Constitutional Court in the matter concerning the said indemnity agreement when she has a toxic relationship with the Attorney General who is representing the State in the matter. Furthermore, neither is such a toxic relationship in the best interest of the administration of justice nor protecting the integrity of the judicial system. If anything, Ms Siyuni’s continued representing the State as a State witness in the controversial indemnity agreement is abuse of the judicial system.