by Natasha Sakala on 15 Nov 2019by Natasha Sakala on 15 Nov 2019by Natasha Sakala on 15 Nov 2019by Sipilisiwe Ncube on 15 Nov 2019
by Ulande Nkomesha on 15 Nov 2019by Natasha Sakala and Stuart Lisulo on 14 Nov 2019by Natasha Sakala on 14 Nov 2019by Natasha Sakala on 13 Nov 2019
by Zondiwe Mbewe on 15 Nov 2019by Zondiwe Mbewe on 15 Nov 2019by Zondiwe Mbewe on 15 Nov 2019by Julia Malunga and Zondiwe Mbewe on 14 Nov 2019
- Goal Diggers
by Elias Banda on 15 Nov 2019by Abraham Kalito on 14 Nov 2019by Abraham Kalito on 13 Nov 2019by Mazuba Muleya on 7 Nov 2019
by Diggers Editor on 14 Nov 2019by Diggers Editor on 13 Nov 2019by Diggers Editor on 12 Nov 2019by Diggers Editor on 10 Nov 2019
- Guest Diggers
- Editor's Choice
by Diggers Correspondent on 24 May 2019by Diggers Reporter on 4 Mar 2019by Andyford Mayele Banda on 29 Jan 2019by Davies Mwila on 22 Jan 2019
by Natasha Sakala on 8 Nov 2019by Felix Kashweka on 4 Oct 2019by Diggers Correspondent on 28 Sep 2019by Douty Chibamba on 25 Sep 2019
How else could the judges have ruled on Bill 10, after submitting to Parliament?By Diggers Editor on 6 Nov 2019
The Law Association of Zambia has lost an application for an injunction to stop Parliament from proceeding to enact the Constitution Amendment Bill number 10 of 2019 while its petition is still before the Constitutional Court.
Four ConCourt judges ruled that the Bill can proceed but Judge Margaret Munalula dissented, saying this was a proper case deserving an injunction against the respondents until the main matter was heard.
How else could the judges have ruled on this matter after making their position absolutely clear to the public in their submission to parliament. The Judiciary appeared before the Parliamentary Select Committee on September 25, this year, regarding the Constitution Amendment Bill number 10 of 2019, and their position was made very clear about what they wanted from this bill. So this was expected.
We were in shock to hear this from the judiciary because as far as we knew, it had not happened anywhere in the world where judges submit themselves to a parliamentary committee to make submissions on a matter of dispute that is before their courts of law.
We said, since we are young, if this had happened in the past, our view was that it was totally wrong and it should not have been allowed to perpetuate.
We have always known that if judges have an issue on a matter, they make their position known in their judgment, like they did yesterday.
We were left confused by the move taken by the judges of Zambia because at that stage, we couldn’t see where the separation of powers stood. Our argument is that it is an absolute responsibility of Parliament to legislate laws, good or bad, and if anyone is aggrieved with the law or the proposals made in a Bill that is about to be enacted, that aggrieved person has the right to go to the other arm of government to seek intervention – the Judiciary.
We do not see anywhere in the Constitution where it says when a Bill is proposed, judges can go to Parliament to explain the consequences of that law.
Our question is simple, if the judges told parliament that there is nothing wrong with the proposals contained in Bill 10, how would they have U-turned during hearing for the Bill 10 dispute and rule against it?
Did the judges listen objectively to the arguments filed before their court, which disagree with their parliamentary submission?
We are not lawyers, but we were able to see this huge problem from a distance. One just had to use common sense; bias is not always about evidence; perception is enough to show that it exists. What we are seeing here is that our judges created a very dangerous perception of bias, which has only succeeded in making the whole Bill 10 debacle a complete mess.
Yes, Parliament has powers to create laws but it exercised its powers wrongly because this Bill 10 will completely alter the complexion of the entire Constitution. The only institution that could resolve this mess was the Judiciary, but unfortunately, the Judiciary surrendered itself to one party that was dragged to court, leaving the aggrieved party in a disadvantaged position.
We repeat, this is how nations fall; it starts with a small group of greedy people who don’t want to see an end to their rule, and as time goes by, the whole system gets coerced into the greedy agenda.
About Diggers Editor
The Editor of News Diggers gets to decide what is published.
Email: editor [at] diggers [dot] news.
- UPND must set the record straight on gay rights support - 14 Nov 2019
- Yes, Zambia’s debt is criminal! - 13 Nov 2019
- There’re 2 Lungus in State House, we met them both - 12 Nov 2019
- Honourable Kalaba sir, a sorry won’t kill you! - 10 Nov 2019
- Nevers wins white elephant, which way now? PF or UPND? - 9 Nov 2019
- How Mushimba influenced UNZA to pass his wife who failed 2 medical courses (8,348 views)
- DEC arrests Amos for corrupt practices (1,798 view)
- I am ready to face DEC, says Amos (1,613 view)
- Court awards K3.3m damages to family of ZAF officer who died in police custody (1,143 view)
- KCM workers, exam pupils hospitalised in Chingola after inhaling toxic gas from Nchanga Mine (1,066 view)
- Chief Mukuni urged people to vote UPND in 2016, reveals Commission of Inquiry
- Enemies want to divide us as we get to 2021 – Lungu
- PF rule has no respect for human life – ZCCB
- Load shedding, kwacha depreciation slashing business performance – BCI
- Govt will get $2.03bn loan from China for Chipata-Serenje Railway project, reveals Minister
- There’re 2 Lungus in State House, we met them both
- I'm at the bottom but God has a plan, says Mutati as Nevers meets Lungu
- HH among directors of company seeking to mine in Lower Zambezi - Musukwa tells parley
- Yes, Zambia’s debt is criminal!
- Govt cancelled presidential jet purchase due to austerity measures – Wina
Subscribe For News In Email
The News Diggers
Deputy News Editor
Plot No. Lus/9812/649-MC8
off Alex Chola Road
P.O. Box 32147
Telephone or WhatsApp:
diggers [at] diggers [dot] news
editor [at] diggers [dot] news
Send this to a friend