- Goal Diggers
- Guest Diggers
LAZ asks ConCourt to throw out Musoma’s suit over Bill 10By Zondiwe Mbewe on 20 Sep 2019
The Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has asked the Constitutional Court to dismiss a matter in which three politicians and two individuals have sued the association over its decision to drag President Edgar Lungu and the National Assembly to court for attempting to alter the Constitution of Zambia through Bill 10.
LAZ has argued that the matter should be dismissed with costs on the ground that it’s illegally before the Constitutional Court.
In this matter, Zambia Republican Party president Wright Musoma, Richard Mumba, New Congress Party president pastor Peter Chanda, Mwanalushi Mulemwa, and Citizens Democratic Party president Robert Mwanza commenced an action by way of originating summons and cited LAZ, seeking a declaration that its decision to sue President Edgar Lungu, is illegal and contravenes Article 98 (1) of the Constitution.
The applicants further want an interim order to stay proceedings in the said case.
They are also seeking, among other reliefs, an order declaring that LAZ’s decision to sue the National Assembly is illegal and contravenes Section 12 (1) of the State Proceedings Act, and therefore null and void.
But LAZ, through its lawyers from Simeza, Sangwa and Associates, has argued that the case has contravened Article 128(3) of the Constitution.
“Subject to Article 28, a person who alleges that – an Act of Parliament or statutory instrument; an action, measure or decision taken under law; or an act, omission, measure or decision by a person or an authority; contravenes this constitution, may petition the Constitutional Court for redress,” LAZ submitted.
It stated that the applicants had not complied with the said provision in moving the Constitutional Court.
LAZ further submitted that Musoma and others in moving the court, were bound to follow the provisions of the Constitution in so far as they relate to how the Constitutional Court could be moved.
It added that the need to comply with the Constitution extended even to the manner of moving the Constitutional Court as long as it was prescribed by the court.
“In this case, the applicants are bound to respect the Constitution in moving this court and it’s our position that they did not do so making this action illegal. In moving this court, the applicants contravened the provisions of Article 128 (3) of the Constitution,” LAZ argued.
It further argued that the Constitutional Court had original and final jurisdiction in matters that related to the violation or contravention of the Constitution.
“Whereas, Article 128(1) of the constitution deals with the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court, Article 128(3) deals with the procedure for moving the court where one alleges: (a) that an Act of Parliament or Statutory Instruments;(b) an action, measure or decision taken under law or (c) an Act, omission, measure or decision by a person or an authority contravenes the Constitution. The Constitution requires the person who makes such a an allegation to petition the Constitutional Court for redress or remedy,” LAZ argued.
It submitted that since it was the foundation of the applicants’ case that there had been contraventions of the Constitution by LAZ, they should have moved the court by petition pursuant to Article 128 (3)(b) or (c) of the Constitution and not by originating summons.
“Their failure to move the court by petition is a contravention of the Constitution and therefore, the case before court against the respondent (LAZ) is illegally before court. The court cannot therefore, hear or decide it on the merit. By moving the court by originating summons, the applicants have contravened Article 128 (3) of the Constitution, section 8 (3) of the Constitutional Court Act and Order 4 Rule 1 of the Constitutional Court Rules,” LAZ submitted.
It prayed that the Originating Summons before court be dismissed on the ground that it was illegally before the Constitutional Court and that the applicants be condemned to pay costs of and occasioned by the proceedings.
The matter comes up for hearing on October 8, this year.
About Zondiwe Mbewe
Zondiwe has interest in writing political and current affairs on issues which affect every Zambians.
Email: zondiwe [at] diggers [dot] news
- Pilato asks Lungu to relax sanctions against Prime TV - 31 Mar 2020
- Lubinda breaks down as he recalls being slapped by PF cadre - 31 Mar 2020
- ZCCM-IH to appeal High Court’s decision to dismiss fraud case against FQM, 6 others - 31 Mar 2020
- Provide protective clothing to all health workers fighting COVID-19, MQHZ urges govt - 31 Mar 2020
- We need lockdown asap – Magande - 30 Mar 2020
- Zambia's COVID-19 cases jump to 35 (26,994 views)
- Govt identifies Chaisa, Jack Compound, Ibex Hill as COVID-19 hot zones (21,040 views)
- Let’s sympathise with Lungu and help him, or we will all perish! (14,151 views)
- High Court keeps Spax in jail (9,609 views)
- COVID-19 cases rise to 29 (7,270 views)
- COVID-19 leaves PF general conference in limbo
- Correctional Services mulls release of inmates due to COVID-19 pandemic
- Swabs have become a rare commodity, laments public national health institute
- Katuka denies ordering youth punch-up at UPND secretariat
- MISA asks ECZ to expedite dismantling of 2016 debt owed to media houses
Subscribe for news email alerts
ArchivesApr0 PostsMay0 PostsJun0 PostsJul0 PostsAug0 PostsSep0 PostsOct0 PostsNov0 PostsDec0 Posts
- «March 2020»
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
Send this to a friend