CONCOURT adjourns eligibility case
HEARING to determine whether a single judge was eligible to preside over an interlocutory motion was adjourned by the Constitutional Court yesterday.
This is in a matter in which Heritage party leader Brigadier General Godfrey Miyanda had asked the Constitutional Court to determine whether a single judge was eligible to proceed over an interlocutory motion.
The matter in question is where Gen. Miyanda had wanted the court to dismiss a case where Dr Dan Pule and three others want an interpretation of whether President Edgar Lungu can contest the 2021 presidential elections.
In the main matter, four opposition party leaders Daniel Pule of Christian Democratic Party, Zambia Republican Party leader Wright Musoma, Peter Chanda of the New Congress Party and Citizen Democratic Party leader Robert Mwanza sued the Attorney General over the tenure of office and eligibility of President Lungu.
In his summons filed in court, Brig Gen Miyanda, was seeking an order that the orders by a single judge to amend the original originating summons in the main matter and orders of direction given on June 23, be nullified or reviewed in order to set aside or vary the order for directions.
He submitted that the court should instead order that he should be heard by the full bench of the Constitutional Court as originally stated by the single judge.
When the matter came up for possible commencement before a full bench of the Constitutional Court headed by Constitutional Court president judge Hilda Chibomba, counsel for the four opposition leaders, Bonaventure Mutable asked for an adjournment as his clients were not ready to proceed with the matter as they needed more time to file documents in opposition and to respond to Brig Gen Miyanda’s application.
Mr Mutale said he was served with the affidavit in support of the application to nullify the single judge order for directions but that Mr Miyanda’s application was taken as an interlocutory application which was supposed to be accompanied by summons endorsed with a return date.
He further argued that article 129 (2) of the constitution stated that the Constitutional court shall be constituted by a single judge when hearing an interlocutory matter.
“We have filed documents in opposition since interlocutory documents of this nature under the constitutional court act ought to be heard by a single judge,” he said.
And the Attorney General Likando Kalaluka who is the first respondent and the Law Association of Zambia, the second respondent did not oppose the adjournment.
Meanwhile Brig Gen Miyanda argued that the applicants should have been ready and should have responded in good time since the cause list was showing 30th October, 2017.
Brig Gen Miyanda is the third interested party in which the Law Association of Zambia and the UPND joined
In her ruling, Justice Chibomba said the arguments were premature as there was already an application for an adjournment. The matter was then adjourned