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.