Maravi

Defending what can't be defended

Defending what can't be defended
By The Post
Thu 06 Oct. 2011, 14:00 CAT

If Sebastian Zulu does not see that there is corruption in the judiciary, then we have a very big problem with the man Michael Sata has made justice minister.

However, it is understandable knowing where Sebastian is coming from that corruption is not very much an issue with him. This is the man who had no difficulties receiving money from the MMD to destabilise his own political party, UNIP, of which he was secretary general.

We would hope that he has learnt something from that experience. Sebastian got away with that corruption and today he thinks everyone should get away with corruption. What he tried to destroy was a club, UNIP. What is at stake today with corruption in the judiciary is the stability, peace, prosperity and indeed the entire future of our country.

When we comment about corruption in the judiciary, we are not making baseless allegations. We are not children or disgruntled elements. We know what we are talking about.

If Sebastian is ignorant about what has been going on in the judiciary, the best he can do is keep quiet and watch because we can promise him he will have a lot to see. We agree that not everyone in the judiciary is rotten, not every judge and magistrate is corrupt. There are some judges and magistrates who are very decent. What is unfortunate is that the bad ones are giving the judiciary a bad name.

Their wrongdoing is obliterating whatever good things might be happening in our judiciary. The judiciary is like a sick person. Even if it is just one part of the body that is sick, the whole body is affected. And the unfortunate part of our judiciary is that it has a serious headache, a troubled head that needs to be treated.

Chief Justice Ernest Sakala has failed to offer the kind of leadership that would have been expected of a man of his intellect and experience. Today, our judiciary is pathetically dysfunctional and incapable of winning the confidence of many of our people.

And the complaints about the way our judiciary is run are not only coming from us - some judges are complaining, some magistrates are complaining, even ordinary judiciary workers are complaining. Lawyers are complaining and this is why even the Law Association of Zambia is calling for serious reforms in the judiciary.

Litigants are also complaining about corruption in the judiciary. This is a judiciary that has lost a Chief Justice to corruption. Chief justice Mathew Ngulube was forced to resign his position because of corruption, because of unprofessional behaviour and lack of integrity. Is Sebastian telling us that Ngulube is the only judge who was corrupt?

Sebastian should realise that his boss, Michael Sata, has been elected on a reform agenda. Our people are expecting this government to transform their institutions into functioning ones that are going to deliver according to expectations. The judiciary is one such institution that needs transformation. The patronage that has overtaken our politics has not left the judiciary unaffected.

The judiciary has also operated under a shameful system of patronage that should not be allowed to continue. And this patronage was well-demonstrated by the behaviour of no other than justice Sakala himself. Justice Sakala refused to shake hands in church with the leader of the leading opposition party at the time simply because it put him in good light with those who were in charge of the executive.

Today, the man whose hand justice Sakala, for no good reason, refused to shake is the President of our country. By that behaviour alone, if nothing else, justice Sakala showed himself to be a man driven by emotionalism and therefore incapable of being dispassionate.

In other societies where very high levels of integrity are demanded of judges, justice Sakala would have been forced to resign. This is the man who saw nothing wrong in sharing a platform with a politically powerful and politically convenient convict at a state function. We have not forgotten that justice Sakala shared a table with Regina Chiluba, the wife of the late Frederick Chiluba, at a time when she had been convicted of a criminal offence.

This is the head of our judiciary today. Sebastian knows all these things. His defence of the judiciary is totally misplaced. Let him tell the nation that the judiciary has not done the things they are accused of. If Sebastian is doubting us, let him set up an inquiry and see what will come up.

No one is saying that judges and magistrates should be tried for delivering wrong judgments. Nowhere have we ever said such a thing because it would be wrong for us to adopt such a position.

And we have made it very clear that what is at issue here is not whether the judgment to acquit Chiluba was right or wrong. The question is who was talking to who during that time, and what were they discussing? Is the judgment that was delivered on a Monday the same one that should have been delivered on Friday?

Our people are entitled to know. What role did justice Sakala or his office play in this matter? Rupiah Banda has publicly claimed credit for Chiluba's acquittal. What does justice Sakala have to say about this?

We will be more than ready to bring more witnesses to testify to the fact that Chiluba was told by Rupiah that he had secured his acquittal long before magistrate Jones Chinyamba officially acquitted him.

The question is how was this possible? How did Rupiah procure this acquittal? These are the things we are concerned about because they violate the Bangalore principles Sebastian is talking about.

There are judges sitting on the bench today who have abused trust funds which the judiciary has been managing. These are matters of general public knowledge. There are also judges who have questionably allocated themselves cases in which their political friends have an interest and have gone on to make incredible judgments that cannot be defended in law.

These matters are well known. They are being discussed in the corridors of our courts. It is not us bringing these matters. We don't work for the judiciary. Information is available from the judiciary itself. If people were interested to know the truth, they would find it.

The problems of the judiciary are not only of a criminal nature. Some are even of an embarrassing moral nature. Again, it is not us saying these things. Sebastian's boss said it the other day.

If Sebastian wants to be successful in his job as justice minister, he should side with the people and learn to make pronouncements that advance public interests.

Anyway, there is always a problem when people are given jobs they have not earned, they have not struggled for. They always try to pursue an agenda that is at loggerheads with the forces that produced those jobs.

Michael has waged a long and tenacious struggle. He has sometimes been a victim of the same judiciary in that long struggle. If Sebastian does not see the need to reform the judiciary and remove the rot from it, then he is in the wrong place at the wrong time and he will soon find himself at loggerheads with our people.

Let him ask himself why people were prepared to take the law in their own hands during the last election when they thought their victory would be snatched from them. It was because people did not believe the courts will be able to give them justice. This is the kind of judicial system we have.

Sebastian is defending what cannot be defended. And he is not defending it with truth. Sebastian is instead twisting things and principles to try and justify what cannot be justified.

Labels: CORRUPTION, JUDICIARY

posted by MrK @ 3:22 PM