CHOMBA MUSIKA
Lusaka
THE Constitutional Court has dismissed a petition which challenged the legality of the Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) report which recommended removal of three judges.
The petition filed by constitutional lawyer Tresford Chali was thrown out for want of jurisdiction – meaning it was before a wrong court.
“…it is our finding that in order to maintain the principle of comity of courts, we determine that in line with Article 128 (1) (e) of the Constitution, this matter does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court.
“The petition is, therefore, dismissed for want of jurisdiction,” the judgment verdict reads in part.
In the petition, Mr Chali, who cited the JCC and Attorney General as respondents, challenged the manner the JCC conducted itself.
This is in relation to the report that was issued by the JCC, whose proceedings he claimed were a nullity and unconstitutional.
Mr Chali has argued that the JCC overstepped its bounds in recommending the removal of ConCourt judges – Palan Mulonda, Mungeni Mulenga and Anne Sitali – on October 4, 2024.
But in response, the State argued that the petitioners’ contention that the JCC panel which recommended the removal of the three judges never formed a quorum and was illqualified is misconceived.
The Attorney General urged the court to dismiss the petition.
A seven-member bench comprising judges Arnold Shilimi, Martin Musaluke, Judy Mulongoti, Maria Kawimbe, Mathew Chisunka, Mudford Mwandenga and Kenneth Mulife dismissed the petition.
Mr Chali’s issues raised were supposed to be heard by the High Court.
“It is trite in this jurisdiction, that a person who seeks to challenge the actions or decisions of an inferior administrative body can only do so by way of judicial review,” the document reads.
“We, therefore, find that the issues raised by the petitioner seek to assail the actions and findings of the JCC in its report dated October 20, 2024.”
The court ruled that Mr Chali ought to have challenged the JCC’s report on the removal of judges through judicial review before the High Court.
Meanwhile, jailed politician Raphael Nakacinda has withdrawn a petition in which he challenged the constitutionality of the seditious practice charges imposed on him.
