Maravi

Changing our Judiciary's negative image

Changing our Judiciary's negative image
By The Post
Sun 01 Jan. 2012, 14:00 CAT

TRULY, the negative image of the Judiciary needs to change. And it is good that Chief Justice Ernest Sakala has recognised the fact that the Judiciary's image is negative. Admission of a problem is the first step in trying to find a solution. With this admission by Chief Justice Sakala, we are confident that our Judiciary will soon get on the path to self-correction.

When problems are admitted publicly, it becomes easier to solve them. Of course, our enemies will always try to take advantage of those problems we have publicly admitted or acknowledged.

But they will not be able to get much out of it because we will be able to clear those problems away. It is therefore necessary to take a forthright attitude towards our own problems.

It is true that the image of our Judiciary is negative and there's need to change it. But this change of image will not come from the new judges. The new judges are not replacing the old crop of judges. Justice Sakala still remains the Chief Justice.

And many other judges who have tainted the Judiciary's image are still there as judges. This is a Judiciary that even promotes judges who have tainted the institution's image. How is the negative image of the Judiciary going to be changed by the appointment of Chalwe Mchenga, a man who disgraced the previous high judicial position he held? Mchenga, as Director of Public Prosecutions, became part of a syndicate that was protecting wrongdoers, corrupt elements from going to jail.

Mchenga, in connivance with George Kunda, attempted to free Kashiwa Bulaya from legitimate prosecution claiming there was no adequate evidence to secure his conviction.

Following public pressure, Levy Mwanawasa ordered that Bulaya be prosecuted and indeed, he was accordingly convicted. Even his appeal failed. We saw, not very long ago, how Mchenga connived with Rupiah Banda to let Frederick Chiluba go scot-free.

There was demand by the Law Association of Zambia and many other civil society organisations for Mchenga to resign. He didn't because he had no shame. He seems to be a hardcore element in that type of behaviour.

Today Mchenga is a High Court judge in a Judiciary whose image is negative. And Justice Sakala was one of the people who supported Mchenga's appointment as High Court judge. The Law Association of Zambia opposed the appointment of this disgraced man as a High Court judge.

Justice Sakala himself has disgraced the Judiciary in his conduct that showed serious political bias, patronage or partisanship. We have not forgotten how Justice Sakala refused to shake hands with Michael Sata in church. Why did Justice Sakala behave that way? It is simply because it was politically convenient for him to do so.

But today, the same Justice Sakala is all over trying to be in good books with Michael, the man he had so much contempt for. What change of image can Justice Sakala bring to our Judiciary?

Clearly, any attempt to change the image of our Judiciary that leaves this current leadership intact in the hands of Justice Sakala will not achieve much. The image of the Judiciary sunk to its lowest under the leadership of Justice Sakala.

There is no justification whatsoever for Justice Sakala to continue serving as Chief Justice on a contract of a Judiciary he has clearly failed to properly lead. The changes required to restore the image of the Judiciary will not come from Justice Sakala and cannot be led by him. The judges and magistrates who have disgraced the Judiciary are very much under the protection of Justice Sakala.

Under Justice Sakala, Jones Chinyama who highly questionably acquitted Chiluba under a scheme that Rupiah has claimed credit for has been promoted to the Industrial Relations Court. This raises many questions about Justice Sakala's view or role in what was going on, in Chiluba's highly-questionable acquittal.

Was Justice Sakala part of the Rupiah scheme to free Chiluba? Was Justice Sakala part of the Mchenga move to withdraw the appeal against Chiluba's acquittal?
Judge Evans Hamaundu is still there after delivering a clearly faulty judgment over the registration of the London High Court judgment against Chiluba. This was also not appealed by Attorney General Abyudi Shonga.

Why? Clearly, there was a scheme in which many people with judicial functions participated to free Chiluba from all corruption cases, criminal or civil. Where was Justice Sakala in all this? What leadership did Justice Sakala provide in dealing with these issues?

The negative image of our Judiciary can be partly attributed to Justice Sakala's inability to adequately defend and advance the independence of our Judiciary. And the independence of our Judiciary is central to the administration of fair and equal justice in our country.

Justice Sakala failed to provide adequate leadership to guarantee or at least promote the independence of our Judiciary, in the day-to-day administration of justice. We started to increasingly see a tendency in our Judiciary to settle cases in a manner that was not expected to be in any real sense independent.

Justice started to appear like it was a prerogative of those in power which they carried out through our judges and magistrates. Our judges and magistrates, under the leadership of Justice Sakala, started to appear like they were agents of those in power.

Those of us who have to pronounce judgments on persons and situations should view the exercise of their authority as a service of the truth for the common good as well as for the wellbeing of the individual.

Zambians want a truly independent Judiciary. And it is not Justice Sakala who is going to give us a truly independent Judiciary because he has shown great inability to do so. It is the Zambian people collectively who will give themselves a truly independent Judiciary.

The Zambian people want a Judiciary where all are equal regardless of their social or political status. We are just coming from a period when our Judiciary did everything possible to fulfil the wishes of Rupiah. If Rupiah's wish was for Chiluba to be set free, our Judiciary set him free.

If Rupiah's wish was for Chiluba to retain his loot, our Judiciary made sure this was so. This is what, among other things, has led to this negative image of our Judiciary today. This is what needs to be corrected for our Judiciary to have a positive image in the eyes of our people.

Labels: CHALWE MCHENGA, CORRUPTION, JUDICIARY

posted by MrK @ 5:45 PM