HH demands ruling on bill of rights
“We know that the Constitutional Court already made its judgment and that judgment is final but for the sake of public record we want this court to address on the issue of the petitioners grievances regarding their rights,” Mr Sangwa said.
HAKAINDE Hichilema wants the High Court to rule that the Constitutional Court violated his rights under the Bill of Rights, though he admits that he the court ruling was final and cannot be reviewed. This is in a matter where UPND leaders Mr Hichilema and his vice Geoffrey Mwamba petitioned the High Court alleging that the Constitutional Court violated their rights when it threw out their presidential petition. The UPND leaders told High Court Judge Mwila Chitabo through their lawyer John Sangwa that it was not in dispute that the decision of the Constitutional Court is final and they did not wish to have it reviewed. "We are not asking this court to reopen the decision of the Constitutional Court. We want to know whether what the ConCourt did was in consistence with Article 18 (9). "We know that the Constitutional Court already made its judgment and that judgment is final but for the sake of public record we want this court to address on the issue of the petitioners grievances regarding their rights," Mr Sangwa said. Mr Sangwa argued that only the High Court and not the Constitutional Court had the preserve to enforce the bill of rights. Meanwhile, Solicitor -General, Abraham Mwansa argued that the petition was misconceived at law as it was the preserve of the Constitutional court. Mr Mwansa raised three preliminary issues asking the court whether the determination of the presidential petition was a civil right so as to be brought within the scope of article 18(9) of the constitution. Whether the High Court could enquire into a question of failure to hear the presidential petition when the same petition was never heard on account of negligence of the petitioner as can be seen on the judgment of the Constitutional Court. He also asked whether the High Court had jurisdiction to interpret the Constitutional or the Bill of Rights. Mr Mwansa argued that the UPND leaders only have themselves to blame when the 14 days, time frame to hear the presidential petition run out on them. "In the case of HH and Geoffrey Mwamba vs Edgar Lungu, Inonge Wina, ECZ and the Attorney General, the majority judgment of the Constitutional Court said it was ready to hear the petition within the prescribed 14 days but the petitioner concentrated on interlocutory application at the expense of ensuring that the petition was heard within the prescribed 14 days, " Mr Mwansa said. The matter was adjourned to Monday for continuation.