By Mwaka Ndawa
CONSTITUTIONAL lawyer John Sangwa has petitioned Attorney General Likando Kalaluka in the Constitutional Court for demanding for exagarated costs after the court dismissed his petition against the Electoral Commission of Zambia.
He wants an order of certiorari quashing section 30 of the Constitutional Court Act and the award of costs in cause no.2021/CCZ/0021.
In his petition, Sangwa said he petitioned the Electoral Commission of Zambia for omitting the clause which requires presidential candidates to state the number of times they have held office in its affidavit for presidential candidates and running mates when filing in nomination papers.
He said the petition was pursuant to Article 128(3) of the constitution.
Sangwa said his contention in the said petition was that the affidavit for presidential candidates and running mates did not meet the requirements of Article 52 of the constitution because it did not require a candidate to state on oath the number of times he has held office as president as required by Article 106(3) of the constitution.
He stated that on May 5, 2021, Kalaluka applied to be joined to the proceedings as a second respondent before a single judge.
“The petitioner opposed the application but the objection was overruled and the Attorney General was joined to the proceedings as the second respondent,” Sangwa said.
He explained that on May 11, Lusaka lawyer Lewis Mosho applied to be joined to the proceedings as an interested party which he opposed but the court proceeded to join him.
Sangwa stated that on May 14, the petition was heard and before closing his case, he informed the court that depending on the outcome of the matter, he desired to address the Constitutional Court on the issue of costs but the court ignored him.
He said the court dismissed his petition with costs and further indicated that a full judgement would be delivered on May 27, 2021 but the same has not been delivered.
“By letter dated May 17, 2021 from Lewis Nathan Advocates to the petitioner, Mosho demanded costs in the sum of K1,500,000. By another letter on the same date, Milimo Chooka and associates representing Mosho demanded K1,500,000 and another law firm representing him, Makebi Zulu advocates, by letter dated May 18 demanded costs in the sum of K1,500,000,” Sangwa stated.
“In effect, Mosho has demanded costs from the petitioner in the sum of K4,500,000 in a case which lasted three days.”
Sangwa further explained that by letter dated May 20, 2021, the state demanded costs in the sum of K5,000,000 but that ECZ never demanded costs after the petition was settled.
He said Mosho and Kalaluka were demanding K9,500,000 from him as costs which was more than US$400,000.
He said section 30 of the Constitutional Court Act no.8 of 2016, to the extent that it confers discretionary power on the Constitutional Court to award costs in proceedings before it contravenes Articles 2, 52(4), 67(3), 101(4), 103(1) and 128(3) of the constitution.
He wants a declaration that section 30 of the Constitutional Court Act to the extent that it confers discretionary power on the Constitutional Court to award costs violates Articles 2, 52(4), 67(3), 101(4), 103(1) and 128(3) of the constitution and is null and void.
Sangwa is further seeking a declaration that the award of costs by the court in cause no.2021/CCZ/0021 contravened Articles 2, 52(4), 67(3), 101(4), 103(1) and 128(3) of the constitution and the award of costs is null