The holding that running mates are not candidates put the Constitutional Court in an awkward position and a guagmire that the court has put itself in and will fail to extract itself out of the same unless and until it digs itself out as it did in the Michelo Chizombe v Edgar Changwa Lungu per incuriam judgement.
In the recent case of Isaac Mwanza (attached below), the Constitutional Court which has ruled repeatedly that the Constitution is to be read in a manner that promotes the Bill of Rights as provided under Article 267 has effectively killed other fundamental freedoms and rights under Article 19 (freedom of conscience) and Article 21 (freedom of assembly and association) as read with Article 11 (b) of Act No. 18 of 1996.
A person under those constitutional provisions has a right to change his or her mind and to choose who to associate and assemble with. To hold that a person should stick to his or her previous decision and stick with people he or she no longer believes or wants to associate or assemble with creates unintended consequences on the above freedoms and rights.
How can a Constitution be interpreted to give effect to the Bill of Rights when some freedoms and rights are being unintentionally sacrificed and killed?
What should the Constitutional Court do:
1. Vacate it’s position that Running Mates are not candidates whilst at the same time holding that a Presidential Candidate and a Running Mate are twinned and paired who cannot live without the other. How can you have twins who are not twins? How can you have a pair which is not a pair? By implication, whether or not the Constitution expressly refers to Running Mates as Candidates, a Running Mate is a candidate for the election of Vice President.
2. A resignation from a political party or withdrawal from the race makes the twinned ticket incompetent and makes the nomination invalid. You cannot force one to be part of a ticket and deny him or her the right to associate or assemble. To force a person to run for an election which they don’t want to be a part of as they may have changed their mind is unconscionable and flies in the teeth of Article 267.
You cannot accord a Presidential Candidate a right to resign or withdraw but deny the same right to their Running Mate as that amounts to discrimination and to some extent exploitation and forced labour. This position too has to be changed.
DR Joseph Chirlwa