‘IT’S HIS OPINION’

... UPND responds to deputy Chief Justice

THE deputy chief justice, Marvin Mwanamwambwa was entitled to his opinion by suggesting that the Constitutional Court should have cited UPND leader, Hakainde Hichilema for contempt for allegedly issuing disparaging remarks against three judges. Mr Kakoma said that citizens had a constitutional right to criticize judges when they err in judgement.

“The matter happened a long time ago, why should people start pursuing that today? The constitutional court did not charge Mr Hichilema because it did not deem that as an offence. People have the right to criticise judges when they err in judgement. The deputy chief justice only rendered an opinion, people must be free to express themselves,” he said.

Justice Mwanamwambwa had indicated that Mr Hichilema should have been cited for contempt by the constitutional court when he accused its judges Mungeni Mulenga, Palan Mulonda and Annie Sitali of being corrupt.

Mr Kakoma however reiterated that the deputy chief justice was merely expressing his opinion, “he was expressing himself.”

He said that Justice Mwanamwambwa’s statement did not mean that Mr Hichilema was guilty before prosecution.

A Lufwanyama resident,

Henry Chilombo had written to the office of the chief justice to have the UPND leader investigated for accusing

Constitutional Court Justices of being corrupt, saying the sentiments constituted contempt of Court.

Mr Chilombo had complained that Mr Hichilema, at a media briefing at his residence in New Kasama last year and whilst in South Africa, had accused the three judges of corruption and being under the control of the President for throwing out his petition.

In response, Justice Mwanamwambwa said that the accusation on three Constitutional Court Judges did not need an inquiry because evidence was already there.

Justice Mwanamwambwa said that the evidence was documented in form of a report of utterances by the named culprit. In a letter addressed to Mr. Chilombo and copied to the Director of Public Prosecutions, Justice Mwanamwambwa however explained that it was for the court or adjudicator attacked or insulted, who should have the culprit summoned and charged for contempt of court.

Mr Chilombo has since written to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the judicial complaints commission to deal with the matter.

The matter happened a long time ago, why should people start pursuing that today? — Mr Kakoma.