Africa-Press – Zambia. The Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti’s decision to prevent all Patriotic Front Members of Parliament from taking part in the business of the house despite filling appeals against their nullified seats in Higher court has drawn sharp criticism from a section of lawyers.
Yesterday, Speaker Mutti ruled that Kabushi Member of Parliament Bowman Lusambo is out of order to remain in the House after the nullification of his election victory by the High Court.
Ms. Mutti has further ruled that in view of her ruling, all Members of Parliament whose election results were nullified by a decision of the High Court, whether or not such a decision has been appealed against, shall forthwith not take part in any Parliamentary business.
She said only those who will be successful in their appeals in the Constitutional Court will be allowed back in the House and take part in Parliamentary Business.
The Speaker was ruling on a point of order raised by Solwezi East MP Dr. Alex Katekwa against Mr. Lusambo on whether he was in order to remain in the house following the nullification of his seat by the High Court.
According to the speaker’s interpretation of Article 73 of the constitution, when the Petition is determined by the High Court and a seat is nullified, a Member shall cease to hold the seat and shall not take part in any parliamentary business unless and until the Constitutional Court overturns the decision of the High Court, adding that, however, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) cannot proceed to hold by-elections until the decision of the Constitutional Court.
However, this position has drawn criticism from a cross-section of lawyers. Leading the charge is Lusaka Lawyer John Sangwa who, while speaking to Diamond TV, said that according to Article 72 of the Constitution, the office of Member of Parliament becomes vacant if the Member of Parliament is disqualified as a result of a decision of the Constitutional Court and that the Constitution does not provide for declaration of the seat of a Member of Parliament by decision of a High Court or any other Court.
Mr. Sangwa wondered why the speaker ignored article 72 and describe her decision as unsound and illogical, and not making sense. Mr. Sangwa’s position was also echoed by Lusaka Lawyer Dickson Jere who said that once there is an appeal of the Petition to the Constitutional Court as envisaged in Article 73(3), the provisions of Article 73(4) which states that a Member of Parliament whose election is petitioned shall hold the seat in the National Assembly pending the determination of the election petition.
Mr. Jere said this works when the petition is filed at first instance in the High Court as well as at the ConCourt when there is an appeal so soi as to keep the constituency with representation while the case is going on because there is no timeline when the matter goes to the ConCourt unlike in the High Court.
“So a constituency cannot stay without an MP for months and years without representation,” he said.
For More News And Analysis About Zambia Follow Africa-Press
