Dora's new day in court set

LUSAKA High Court Judge Philip Musonda set June 15, 2009 as day for judgement in a case involving former Minister of Communications and Transport Dora Siliya's application for judicial review over the findings of the Dennis Chirwa tribunal.

Mr Justice Musonda on May 26 said he would pass judgement exactly 14 days after filing of submissions by both the applicant and the respondents.

“To be generous and democratic, I will give you two more days to file submissions. In judicial review, they rely on affidavit evidence unless there are compelling reasons to have a hearing, and there were none,” Mr Justice Musonda said.

Earlier, Ms Siliya’s lawyer Eric Silwamba informed the court that Lusaka lawyer Wynter Kabimba and other lawyers, who represented former Minister of Communications and Transport William Harrington, wanted to join the matter and be heard. Harrington and a consortium of 10 civil society organisations were complainants in the matter.

And lawyer representing Attorney General Mumba Malila, Professor Patrick Mvunga, said Mr Kabimba had also approached him on the same matter. Prof Mvunga said audience of the court is available to both lawyers but he was constrained to say much on Mr Kabimba’s desire to be heard.

And Mr Justice Musonda told Mr Kabimba that he should have come early to court because the issue of an interlocutory application can be heard and the matter proceed.

“You can’t join the matter and dictate proceedings,” the judge said.

Mr Silwamba then proposed to file his heads of arguments May 26 and advised Mr Kabimba to file his heads of arguments and application to join the matter. Silwamba said he will also address the question whether Mr Kabimba and other lawyers are proper persons to be heard in the matter.

In a notice filed in the High Court registry May 26, lawyers, Eric Silwamba and Company state that the decision to find Ms Siliya in breach of the Constitution was in excess of the tribunal’s jurisdiction.

Ms Siliya, who is Petauke member of Parliament (MP), was found to have breached Article 54(3) of the Constitution for ignoring advice of the Attorney General when she awarded a contract to RP Capital Partners to value Zamtel assets. Mr Silwamba said his client was seeking an order to quash and expunge from the tribunal report, the portion of the decision that purported to decide and make recommendations pursuant to provisions of section 14 (8) of the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct.

The lawyers said the tribunal is said to have purported to adjudicate on Constitutional matters and pronounce itself on provisions of the Constitution, which was the preserve of the High Court of Zambia.

And that, even if it possessed the requisite jurisdiction, it still erred in law when it misconstrued the interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution of Zambia in relation to advice of the Attorney General.

Further that, the finding of the tribunal that Ms Siliya was liable for a malfeasance allegedly committed by the Ministry of Communications and Transport, which was the client of the Attorney General’s Chambers, was unreasonable. The tribunal’s decision demonstrated procedural impropriety in that Ms Siliya was purported to have breached the Constitution without according her procedural fairness of being heard as dictated by the rules of natural justice.

The purported breach of the Constitution of Zambia was not a cognate or minor allegation. Other relief sought was an order for costs and all necessary and consequential directions of the court.