Mulusa questions Supreme Court nullification

Former Solwezi Central MP Lucky Mulusa is seeking legal support to challenge the Supreme Court over its judgment to nullify his seat, citing the impropriety of some of the judges who sat to hear his election petition.

Mulusa has since written to the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) to help him find a legal way to force the Supreme Court review its decision in the matter in which he was challenged by losing PF candidate Newton Malwa.

In a letter dated 3rd January, 2013 to the LAZ president, Mulusa stated that Acting Chief justice Lombe Chibesakunda and her deputy Florence Mumba ought not to have sat.

He said Malwa’s lawyer Bonaventure Mutale was also Acting Chief Justice Chibesakunda’s lawyer in a matter where other lawyers sued her for occupying the office illegally.

The Supreme Court panel which nullified the Solwezi seat constituted Justices Chibesakunda, Florence Mumba, Muyinda Wanki and Elizabeth Muyovwe, JJS.

He said the lawyers for the appellant were still representing the Chief Justice even at the time of delivering judgment on 10th December, 2013.

Mulusa said the Chief Justice heard the appeal from a party which she appeared to have struck a deal with as revealed in the Nevers Mumba Supreme Court contempt  case in which the MMD leader was discharged.

“In August or September 2013, the lawyer for the appellant Mr. B. Mutale became the lawyer for the Acting Chief Justice as well – meaning that his submissions were still being considered by her in the judgment later delivered in December, 2013,” read Mulusa’s letter in part.

Mulusa also questioned the presence of Justice Florence Mumba who had issues at the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ).

The former Solwezi  Central parliamentarian has sought LAZ opinion whether an urgent application can be made to request the Supreme Court for the whole judgment to be reversed or the appeal be heard all over again before a different panel .

He has further requested that LAZ considers representing the matter in public interest and all the lawyers representing the chief justice recuse themselves from the matter.