Judge Nkonde’s case before wrong court – AG

The procedure relating to the removal of a judge is governed by the Constitution of Zambia.

THE Attorney General has asked the Lusaka High Court to set aside an ex -parte order granting Judge Sunday Nkonde leave to commence judicial review proceedings challenging his removal as High Court judge.

Attorney General Likando Kalaluka stated that the ex-parte summons must be dismissed because they were before the wrong court.

In this case, Judge Nkonde is challenging the decision of the Judicial Complaints Commission made on November 14, 2018 in which it wrote to President Edgar Lungu indicating that he should be suspended as he had been found with a case to answer.

This is the second time the JCC has written to President Lungu indicating that the judge was found with a case to answer.

The first time Judge Nkonde was found with a prima facie case, the matter was in the High Court at Kitwe and was settled through a consent order.

Previously, the JCC found that President Lungu was duty bound to suspend Judge Nkonde but he challenged the decision in the High Court and was granted an ex parte order to commence judicial review proceedings which acted as a stay of the decisions.

Lusaka High Court judge-in-charge Gertrude Chawatama granted the stay on November 21, 2018, and ordered that the leave shall operate as a stay of the decision of the JCC committee of November 14, 2018.

But according to an affidavit in support of summons for an order to set aside ex parte order for leave to apply for judicial review filed on March 11 Chibesa Mulonda a senior State advocate in the Attorney General’s chambers, stated judge Nkonde’s application was before a wrong court because the constitution provides procedure as regards to interpretation of the law.

“The procedure relating to the removal of a judge is governed by the Constitution of Zambia. I verily believe that the applicant’s application seeks an interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution in so far as they relate to the removal of a judge. Therefore, it is before the wrong court,” read the document.