LUSAKA lawyer Lewis Mosho has petitioned the Constitutional Court seeking an order that the consolidated petition against President Edgar Lungu be dismissed as it contravenes provisions of the law.
Mosho has argued that the act of petitioning the incumbent President contravenes the mandatory provisions of Article 98(1) of the Constitution which prohibits any person from instituting criminal or civil proceedings against the President.
He has cited historian Dr Sishuwa Sishuwa, Legal Resources Foundation Limited and Chapter One Foundation as first, second and third respondents, respectively.
Legal Resources Foundation, Dr Sishuwa and Chapter One Foundation, in a consolidated matter before the ConCourt, have cited President Lungu as respondent, seeking a declaration that the President having been elected, sworn into and held the office of President from January 25, 2015 to September 13, 2016, and having been declared winner of the 2016 election, sworn into and having held the office of President from September 13, 2016 until the next President is elected under the 2021 election, is not eligible for nomination for election as President in the election set for August 12, 2021.
They are also seeking a declaration that President Lungu’s nomination for election to the office of President scheduled for August 12, 2021 contravenes Article 106(3) of the Constitution, the said nomination is null and void.
But in his petition, Mosho has argued that the action of the trio is an abuse of court process as it was an invitation for the Court to depart from its earlier interpretation of the law surrounding the subject of eligibility.
He is now seeking a declaration that an action, including that of the respondents contravenes the provisions of Article 98 of the Constitution which prohibits any civil or criminal proceedings against the President, who is President Lungu and is therefore null and void.
Mosho is further seeking a declaration that cause number 2021/CCZ/25 and 2021/CCZ/27 as consolidated, commenced by the respondents is an abuse of court process and should be dismissed.
He further sought that each party bear their own costs and that the hearing of the petition be expedited.