FOR over 14 days now, we as Zambians have patiently waited for the judgment of the Constitutional Court on the petition of President-Elect Edgar Lungu by losing candidate in the August 11, 2016 presidential election Hakainde Hichilema of the United Party for National Development (UPND) and his running-mate Geoffrey Mwamba.
According to the amended Constitution of Zambia, we should know the decision of the Constitutional Court on the matter within 14 days of filing the petition.
It is cast in white and black that a presidential petition such as the one in question should not exceed 14 days to be disposed of by the court.
Article 103 (2) of the Constitution says that the Constitutional Court shall hear an election petition relating to the President-elect within 14 days of filing of the petition.
Further, article 103((3) says that the Constitutional Court may, after hearing an election petition — (a) declare the election of the President-elect valid; or (b) nullify the election of the President-elect and Vice-President-elect.
Based on the foregoing, we find it a challenge to understand that the election petition decision has not yet been made following the court’s granting of Mr Hichilema and Mr Mwamba leave to seek legal representation.
On Friday, the Constitutional Court gave the duo leave to do so after their lawyers threw in the towel, saying that there was apparently not enough time to argue their case.
The court gave the parties to the case two days each to present and conclude the petition, which effectively means the case will be concluded this Thursday.
For the greater majority of Zambians, the 14 days in which everything should have occurred pertaining to the petition are up, or are we seeing the judges setting a precedent?
According to what is known by the majority of Zambians, the last day for the petition was last Friday. It is well-known, too, that Mr Hichilema and Mr Mwamba had enough time to do everything that their petition required within the stipulated 14 days.
Our comment is basically predicated on the provision of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, that a presidential petition should be decided within 14 days. And as far as we know, the constitution does not say anything about a petition exceeding 14 days unless we have not understood it.
However, we are cognizant of the fact that there could be precedents set in matters such as this. We do not claim expertise in legal matters, but what we are saying is that the allowance of two days each for both the petitioners and defendants makes it difficult for us to understand the 14-day period within which a presidential petition should be heard by the Constitutional Court.
From what has been made public, only the petitioners’ lawyers have complained about time. While we appreciate that matters like this require a lot of time, we also know that petitioners have a duty to prove their allegations and that they had 14 days.
Like us, there are many others who for one reason or another need an explanation of the days that have been given to the parties to the petition case under discussion. What we know is that the 14 days have expired or maybe we are possibly not counting properly.
Different stakeholders such as the international community are seriously watching what is happening vis-à-vis the election petition, it being the first time such a thing is happening in Zambia.
For that reason, it is important that we know whether we are still within the 14 days of a presidential election hearing or we have passed the period.
The court itself ruled that the 14 days would elapse by Friday midnight. At what point did that view change or what provisions of the constitution did the learned judges rely on to support their decision?
The public deserves an explanation on the turn of events.