TIMOTHY KATANEKWA CHALLENGES REMOVAL AS JUDGE

SACKED High Court Judge Timothy Katanekwa has alleged that the Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) called witnesses to testify and produce documents on behalf of the complainants, thus, breaching the procedural rules of natural justice.

Mr Katanekwa contends that JCC relied on the evidence of the witnesses it had called in making the report to President Hakainde Hichilema in which it recommended for his removal as High Court Judge.

He stated that the JCC had no jurisdiction to hear the complaints against him following his retirement.

He has through his lawyers, Messrs Kang’ombe and Associates filed an application seeking leave of the Lusaka High Court to commence judicial review proceedings challenging his removal as Judge.

If leave is granted, Mr Katanekwa wants the same to operate as a stay of the JCC’s recommendation dated January 25, 2024 to President Hichilema and his removal from office as High Court Judge.

Mr Katanekwa, who turned 65 years on January 3, 2024, which is the retirement age for a Judicial officer was on January 25, 2024 removed from office by Mr Hichilema, acting on the report by the JCC.

In his affidavit in support of the application, the former Judge stated that the JCC through its three cmmissioners - Mr Vincent Malambo (chairperson), Mr Chad Muleza and Mr Dean Mwansa Mumba - stepped in the shoes of complainants who had the responsibility of independently proving their complaints against him.

He stated that the three commissioners failed to follow procedural rules of natural justice and acted without authority, thereby prejudiced him.

Mr Katanekwa has stated that JCC entertained a complaint from a complainant who had no locus standi to question his appointment as Judge of the High Court when the purported complaint had come from a different constitutional appointment, which showed bad faith and misconduct by the commissioners.

“That in the Industrial Relations Court Ndola Registry, a man who used to steal and sell court records upon being discovered, was disciplined and dismissd from employment. Notwithstanding the evidence, JCC recorded to blame me for delaying to deliver judgement for a case which had a missing file. Without a court record or file, I cannot deliver judgement,” he said.

He said the evidence of his witnesses was not challenged by the complainants but by the named commissioners.