The Crucial Test for Hon. Justice Munalula: Upholding Constitutional Precedent in Former President Dr. Lungu’s Eligibility Case
By Thandiwe Ketis Ngoma
As Zambia braces for the Constitutional Court’s critical ruling on December 10, 2024, regarding the eligibility of former President Dr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu to contest future elections, the nation’s eyes are firmly fixed on the judges presiding over this matter. Among them is Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula, President of the Constitutional Court, whose credibility and fidelity to the Constitution are now under scrutiny.
This is not the first time the Constitutional Court has deliberated on Dr. Lungu’s eligibility. On more than three occasions, the court—Zambia’s final arbiter of constitutional interpretation—has ruled that the two years Dr. Lungu served after the passing of President Michael Sata do not constitute a full presidential term. The court has consistently affirmed that Article 106(6)(b) of the Constitution is clear: a term served for less than three years does not count as a full term.
These rulings collectively established that Dr. Lungu, having only served one full term between 2016 and 2021, remains eligible to contest another term. The Constitutional Court has thus already set a firm precedent, rooted in constitutional provisions, that must guide this latest deliberation.
Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula’s Role Under the Spotlight
Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula, as a member of the bench, is no stranger to the Constitutional Court’s prior rulings on this matter. The question now is whether she will uphold the principles enshrined in the Constitution and the precedent established by the court, or yield to external pressures seeking to overturn these established legal truths.
This case is a test of judicial independence and the integrity of Zambia’s democratic institutions. By turning against previous rulings, Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula risks undermining the credibility of the court and the trust of the Zambian people in its impartiality. Consistency is not merely a procedural requirement; it is the foundation of justice and the rule of law.
A Call to Defend the Constitution
The Zambian people demand nothing less than the highest level of integrity and independence from their judiciary. Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula must remember that this case is more than a legal determination; it is a reflection of the judiciary’s commitment to its constitutional mandate.
It is essential to emphasize that the Constitutional Court has already ruled multiple times that Dr. Lungu is eligible to contest future elections. These decisions are rooted in the plain language of the Constitution, which stipulates that a president who serves less than three years of a term cannot be said to have completed a full term. Had Dr. Lungu served three years or more during his first tenure, he would indeed be ineligible. However, this is not the case, and the court has consistently upheld this interpretation.
The People Are Watching
This moment will define Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula’s legacy and her contribution to Zambia’s democratic governance. Will she uphold the Constitution and remain consistent with the court’s earlier rulings, or will she succumb to pressures that could compromise the judiciary’s integrity?
The Zambian people are watching. The judiciary must stand as a bulwark against political expediency, safeguarding the nation’s democratic values and constitutional order. Hon. Justice Professor Margaret Munalula, the choice is clear: defend the Constitution and the rule of law, or risk eroding the credibility of Zambia’s highest court. History will remember this moment, and it will remember where you stood.
Why single one judge when the full court makes the decision? Why can’t the young lady wait for the judgment day?
There is no need to be emotional charged over ECL ‘s eligibility. Even about former 100 Ziale students are challenging the life ban for not completing LPQE are waiting patiently and professionally without casting aspersions to a judge.
Be cool and calm , young lady
Please stop these childish mind games. They are not going to influence the decision of the Honourable Judges of the ConCourt. The JUDGMENT will be delivered on 10th December, 2024. We shall all know what it is.
What is wrong with this lady? Why can’t she just wait for the judgement by the courts like all of us? Why is she throwing innuendos on the matter for the judgement is made on the matter? Why is she so anxious about the judgement instead of waiting for the court to make it’s judgment? If she is cited for contempt, let her not cry wolf because the matter is actively in court and commenting on it can be considered contempt of court. Please lady cool down, you won’t die if waited for the judgement like the rest of us.
Who is lady anyways?
Previously known as “Mushota” on other platforms I guess.
She’s clearly a fictitious pf creation. You can tell from the writing style as a combination of known pfidiots such as bwamba, shuwa2……
To me this lady is indirectly threatening the judges. Why is she so ardent on a matter that can only be judged as per constitution of our country.
According to this lady, Ms. Ngoma, there is only one verdict she will accept. That her Mr. Edgar Chagwa Lungu is eligible to stand in the 2026 presidential election. As far as she is concerned any ruling contrary to her expectations would be a sure sign of the Constitutional Court succumbing to external political pressure (and her perceived source of this pressure is not difficult to guess).
Lately, this lady has been in overdrive advocating for her Mr. Edgar Lungu and ripping his political adversaries apart. What she is forgetting is that Mr. Lungu packed the Constitutional Court and the judiciary in general with PF cadres who were more than willing to do his bidding. Even the precedents she is talking about were dipped in controversy. One of the dismissed Constitutional Court judges played a critical role in the dubious “election” of Mr. Lungu as PF president. This judge obviously played a decisive part in the rulings and precedents Ms. Ngoma is so passionate about. The judiciary was deliberately loaded to favour Mr. Lungu.
Mr. Lungu was a disaster for our country. It has been confusion wherever he goes, starting with his election as PF president at Mulungushi (there is no record of how many votes he garnered), his election in 2016 was marked by controversy (including the dismissal of the petition on flimsy grounds), his rule was characterized by total anarchy with cadres left to terrorize the general public and the government borrowing money with abandon (zero financial discipline). His “retirement” brought further confusion in PF with at least 3 factions now in existence.
And now we have this eligibility case! Surely, the sooner Mr. Lungu walks off the political stage, the better for the country. He has been nothing but a curse to our nation.
Insomnia is certainly impairing some people’s thinking! Diazepam may help!
UPND is scared stiff of competition. Solution? Elimination of opponents at any cost,including imprisonment and arm twisting of all state institutions!!!