ATTORNEY GENERAL ‘OVERRULES’ SPEAKER

Mr Kabesha, however argued that the Speaker did not breach the Constitution by acting on a notification from the then PF secretary general, Davies Mwila, dated August, 30, 2021, informing the Speaker that Mr Mundubile had been appointed as the Leader of Opposition, following a caucus meeting held between members of the central committee and MPs.

He stated that the practice in the appointment of previous Leaders of Opposition was that the opposition political party with the largest number of seats merely notifies the National Assembly of the person elected to that office.

“We submit therefore, that the first respondent cannot be faulted for receiving communication about the person selected to serve as Leader of the Opposition of the House, or for consequently allowing the person selected to then draw entitlements of the said position. We humbly submit that the facts as laid out by the petitioner do not entitle the petitioner to relief claimed against the respondent,” Mr Kabesha submitted.

In this matter, a Mr Sakala wanted the court to rule that the Attorney General, through the Speaker of the National Assembly breached Article 74(2) of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, as well as Rule 43 of the National Assembly Standing Orders, by accepting Mr Mundubile’s appointment and allowing him to draw all entitlements accrued to the said office.

The petitioner also wanted the court to find the purported PF secretary general, Morgan Ng’ona in breach of the provisions of Article 60(2) (d) of the Constitution by failing to exercise internal democracy as provided for under the said Article.