AG directs DPP to oppose M'membe's conviction
By Maluba Jere
Fri 02 Mar. 2012, 11:00 CAT
ATTORNEY General Mumba Malila has directed the Director of Public Prosecutions not to support the conviction of Post editor Fred M'membe.
Submissions filed in the High Court state that the prosecutors requested the Attorney General to provide an opinion on public policy considerations, if any, on the prosecution of The Post editor and the intended prosecution of US-based Zambian law Professor Muna Ndulo.
According to the submissions, the request was made as a reference to the Attorney General's office in terms of the proviso to Article 56(7) of the Constitution, which reads: "Provided that when the exercise of any such power in any case may, in the judgment of the Director of Public Prosecutions involve general considerations of public policy, the Director of Public Prosecutions shall bring the case to the notice of the Attorney General and shall in the exercise of his powers in relation to that case, act in accordance with any directions of the Attorney General".
This is in a case where M'membe appealed against his conviction for contempt of court arising from an article authored by Prof Ndulo titled "The Chansa Kabwela case: A comedy of Errors" published on August 27, 2009.
According to the state submissions, the Attorney General was of the view that M'membe's prosecution was a perversion of justice and that it should not have been undertaken in the first place.
The submissions state that Malila's opinion on the matter was that the conviction in the circumstances was equally a travesty of justice and directed that the conviction should not be supported.
Malila stated that the prosecution of M'membe and the intended prosecution of Prof Ndulo for contempt were undertaken under an exceptional background.
"I have studied the circumstances that gave rise to this prosecution. As I can ascertain, The Post Newspaper published the article entitled "The Chansa Kabwela Case: a comedy of errors in their Newspaper number 4697 of 27th August 2009...The President, according to the article should never have issued a directive to the police," said Malila.
"The police on the other hand should have exercised professionalism and independence, but they did not; the DPP should have stepped in to redeem the situation, he too failed."
He further said considering the political circumstances of the time and the totality of what transpired, the prosecution of Kabwela was not objectively and professionally undertaken as evidenced by the result of the prosecution which was an acquittal.
Malila added that in many ways, the author of the article complained of was vindicated and that its publication was justified saying the criticism was valid and apt.
He stated that M'membe's prosecution and subsequent conviction was driven by undisguised political interests.
"The effect of the prosecution of those perceived to be criticising injustice is to stifle the constitutionally protected freedom of expression," he said.
"Some prosecutions, including that of Mr Fred M'membe who appeared to be an ardent critic of the government of that time, appeared to have been driven more by undisguised political interests and the need to dole out political patronage rather than achieving justice. This was an affront to the rule of law and is consequently against public policy."
The state in their submissions said it was clear from the Attorney General's opinion that his view was that the conviction of the appellants should not be sustained.
"In the premise, pursuant to Article 56(7) of the Constitution aforesaid, we therefore abide by the Attorney General's direction and do not support the conviction," read the submissions in part.
In 2010, senior resident magistrate David Simusamba sentenced M'membe to four months imprisonment with hard labour after being found guilty of contempt of court together with Post Newspapers.
Magistrate Simusamba also sentenced M'membe to four months simple imprisonment on behalf of Post Newspapers.
However, M'membe appealed against the conviction and the High Court has since set April 2, 2012 as the date for judgment.
Labels: FRED M'MEMBE, MUNA NDULO, THE POST
Read more...
Zambia has entered a dangerous phase – Ndulo
By Amos Malupenga
Wed 18 Aug. 2010, 15:00 CAT
Professor Ndulo (left) observed that Zambia had entered a dangerous phase following Lusaka High Court judge Evans Hamaundu’s decision to throw out an application to register the London High Court judgment that found former president Frederick Chiluba (right) and others liable for theft of about US $46 million public funds. United States based Zambian law Professor Muna Ndulo yesterday said he is shocked and confused by Lusaka High Court judge Evans Hamaundu’s decision to throw out an application by the state to register the London High Court judgment that found former president Frederick Chiluba and others liable for theft of about US $46 million public funds.
Commenting on judge Hamaundu’s judgment, Professor Ndulo observed that Zambia had entered a dangerous phase.
“While respecting the independence of the judiciary as we all must, I am shocked and confused by judge Hamaundu’s judgment,” Professor Ndulo said.
“The courts ought to be listening to reasoned argument. Regretfully, anything is possible in circumstances where courts are prepared to interpret statutes and case law in a manner which serves their desired objectives. Zambia has entered a dangerous phase. The country needs a good constitution that enhances the independence of the judiciary, strips the presidency of the powers and patronage that fuel dictatorial rule.”
Professor Ndulo regretted that the National Constitution Conference in its recently adopted constitution had squandered the opportunity.
Last Friday, judge Hamaundu threw out an application by the state to register the London High Court judgment that found Chiluba and others liable for theft of about US $46 million public funds.
He noted that some of Chiluba’s arguments against the enforcement of the London High Court judgment in Zambia were irrelevant to the issues under his consideration.
This is in a matter in which Chiluba and others challenged an application order granted to the Zambian government, through the Attorney General, for the registration of the judgment.
Judge Hamaundu said if such judgments were not enforceable under any of the written laws, then the creditor should seek to enforce such judgment at common law.
“Therefore, the first issue to be determined in this application is whether the judgment of the London High Court of Justice is enforceable either under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act or under any other written law,” judge Hamaundu said.
“I have searched in our laws, including the ‘Applied Laws’ for any other statutory provision by which judgments obtained in the courts of the United Kingdom can be enforced by direct registration. Other than the Maintenance (Enforcement) Orders Act and, perhaps, the Matrimonial causes Act No. 20 of 2007, I have been unable to find any. Of course, those two statutes do not apply to judgments for payment of money.”
Judge Hamaundu said in the circumstances, the Zambian government should have sought to enforce the London High Court’s judgment by recourse to the common law, under the principles of “Private International Law” or “Conflict of Laws”, as the principles are alternatively known.
“Therefore, in the circumstances of this case, the judgment creditor ought to enforce the London High Court Judgment at common law by commencing an action founded on it as a cause of action. These proceedings do not constitute such an action,” said judge Hamaundu.
“For the foregoing reasons, the judgment debtors’ application to set aside the order granting the judgment creditor leave to register the judgment of the London High Court of Justice succeeds. I hereby set aside the order that was granted to the judgment creditor on the 10th July 2007. In view of the legal issues that this matter has raised, I order that either side bear their own costs.”
Labels: EVANS HAMAUNDA, MUNA NDULO
Read more...
MISA asks govt to stop seeing press as an enemy
By George Chellah
Mon 14 June 2010, 04:00 CAT
MEDIA Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) regional director Kaitira Kandjii has called on the Zambian government to stop viewing the media as an enemy.
In a statement, Kandjii noted that MISA was deeply concerned about the recent harassments of The Post, which had been worsened by the prosecution and detention of the newspaper’s editor-in-chief Fred M’membe.
“MISA views the prosecution and detention of M’membe as a deafening attack on media freedom and freedom of expression. This is indeed one of the darkest hours in Zambian media history.
MISA’s regional secretariat and its 11 chapters throughout southern Africa, outrightly reject the judgment by Magistrate Simusamba and regard it as a betrayal of media freedom and freedom of expression,” Kandjii stated.
“While passing the judgment Magistrate David Simusamba said “the sentence is meant to reform M’membe as well as to deter would-be offenders after him”. These words are a threat to every Zambian and are meant to instill fear.
The Post newspaper has been a major critic to Zambia’s bad governance and its prosecution is a sign by the Zambian government to avenge dissenting voices.”
He stated that it was disturbing to note that The Post and M’membe were being prosecuted for giving a platform to a citizen to express himself on an issue of public concern.
“The Zambian media has a responsibility to publish and broadcast news and information and in this case The Post had the right to publish an opinion article by Professor Ndulo.
The fact that Kabwela’s case was before the court did not override the rights of people to express their opinions about the ongoing trial. It was a matter of public knowledge, interest and dialogue,” Kandjii stated.
“It should also be noted, that the Zambian Penal Code under which M’membe and The Post are being prosecuted is archaic.
Its content emanates from ideologies of the former colonial regime and such sentiments should not have any root in the modern society, which claims an independent judiciary.
The Penal Code is draconian and includes abusive legislation which by their very nature are intended to silence public voices.”
He stated that MISA hopes and trusts that the Zambian High Court would not neglect these facts in its analysis of M’membe’s case.
“MISA still calls on the Zambian government to respect media freedom and freedom of expression as guaranteed by international instruments such as the Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, Declaration of Principle on Freedom of Expression in Africa as well as the Windhoek Declaration which Zambia as a country has ratified,” Kandjii stated.
“MISA has also noted that Zambia has since obliterated the guarantee for media freedom and freedom of expression in its constitution and international tools and thus reflects bad examples to other SADC countries.
MISA calls on the Zambian government to relook on its relationship with the media and stop viewing the media as enemy. The media is a watchdog of democracy and good governance and therefore should be allowed to report freely on any issue of public concern without fear.”
He stated that MISA views the judgment against M’membe and The Post as unjust.
“We share a principled stance with M’membe and The Post that the media is an avenue through which citizens seek, receive and impart information and ideas ‘regardless of frontiers’.
We therefore pledge solidarity as we await the outcome of the appeal,” stated Kandjii. “Furthermore, we call on Zambian citizens to be vocal in their denunciation of the treatment received by M’membe and The Post.
It is our view that an attack against media freedom is an attack against the most vital and basic human right of every citizen, i.e. the right to express ourselves freely.”
Labels: FRED M'MEMBE, MISA, MUNA NDULO, PENAL CODE, PRESS FREEDOM, THE POST
Read more...
Chiluba is showing false loyalty to Rupiah – Sata
By George Chellah and Ernest Chanda
Fri 05 Mar. 2010, 04:02 CAT
FREDERICK Chiluba is showing Rupiah false loyalty, Patriotic Front (PF) leader Michael Sata said yesterday. And Sata said Lusaka Archbishop Telesphore Mpundu's response to Chiluba's attacks on him and the Catholic Church was timely.
In an interview, Sata appreciated United States' Cornell University law Professor Muna Ndulo's opinion on Chiluba's acquittal.
“We have heard those thoughts before that, that's what is supposed to happen. I am not a lawyer myself but I have appeared in court on several occasions so I have my own opinion as a layman on how my brother Chiluba got away with it,” Sata said.
“My brother will get away with several other things as long as he continues behaving the way he is behaving. He is trying to pay back by showing Rupiah Banda false loyalty so that Rupiah should think he is providing company for him when Chiluba doesn't mean anything. People should ask Vera Chiluba's ex-wife what she knows about him.”
And Sata said Archbishop Mpundu's remark that Chiluba harboured hatred for the Catholic Church had vindicated him. He said he would not like to comment much because Chiluba was under so much pressure to please the government.
“Like I have always said, Chiluba is under siege so I don't want to give him more pressure. Already we have lost one minister home affairs deputy minister Misheck Bonshe. So we don't want to lose him also. At the same time I must say that I always get vindicated, so for now I will not comment much,” said Sata.
And Transparency International Zambia president Reuben Lifuka said Prof Ndulo's analysis of the judgment in Chiluba's acquittal, reinforced the view held by many that the government, through the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) should have appealed against the acquittal.
“The analysis eloquently points to the glaring omissions and errors in the manner which the Ndola High Court Registrar - Mr Jones Chinyama handled the whole case. We said it then and we reaffirm it now that the whole case involving the acquittal of Chiluba, which started off very well, soon transformed into nothing but a charade that was allergic to the merits of the case,” Lifuka said.
“Prof Muna Ndulo's opinion raises a number of critical points, which should not be glossed over. Chiluba is on record claiming his money and the questions raised by Prof Ndulo are important for the former President to answer i.e. where did he get the money from? What did he do for him to warrant receipt of US $8.5 million? The point that equally resonates with our analysis is why did Chiluba elect to give an unsworn statement if he was convinced about the source of funds and the use of a government account as opposed to his own personal account?”
Lifuka said Prof Ndulo's legal opinion helps to put the whole issue of Chiluba's acquittal back into the spotlight and it is TIZ's unqualified position that government, even at this late hour, should appeal against Chinyama's verdict.
“The MMD government has more to lose by defending this questionable acquittal than they would if the appeal went head. Chiluba's acquittal will remain an unnecessary blemish on the record of the judiciary in Zambia and a subject of folklore for many generations to come on how the justice system can be defeated for political ends,” Lifuka said.
“Unfortunately, President Rupiah Banda and his government will deservedly equally share in this record of ignominy. What is evident in what has been said by Prof Ndulo is that the ruling party in power can, through sheer arrogance, ignore the valiant attempts by citizens of goodwill to draw their attention to the numerable merits that lie with an appeal but this will not change the widely held position that this is one acquittal that is at variance with the evidence adduced.
“We can only advise that such actions have high political costs and the MMD government will only have themselves to blame when they drown in the sea of political oblivion because of the 'albatross around their waists'.”
Labels: CHILUBA, MUNA NDULO, RUPIAH BANDA, SATA
Read more...
Chiluba is paying back for his acquittal – HH
By George Chellah
Wed 03 Mar. 2010, 04:00 CAT
UPND leader Hakainde Hichilema yesterday said Professor Muna Ndulo's expert legal opinion on Frederick Chiluba's acquittal confirms that President Rupiah Banda was expecting political favours in return.
Commenting on United States’ Cornell University law Professor Ndulo's opinion on Chiluba's acquittal, Hichilema said the truth of the matter was that the majority Zambians wanted the appeal against Chiluba to be granted.
“And the Presidency categorically refused to allow the judiciary and, of course, through the prosecution, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to proceed with the appeal.
So the President clearly acted against public interest and what Prof Ndulo is basically expressing is another view that probably gave credence to the public opinion at the time,” Hichilema said.
“We all know that President Banda had made a lot of strange pronouncements and now I think we are confirming why he did those pronouncements.
He was expecting political favours in return. And these campaigns we see, these press conferences where the opposition people like ourselves are being ridiculed is in exchange for the refusal by Banda to allow the appeal.
“Everybody knows that Banda sat on the appeal. Prof Ndulo as a legal expert… whether we like it or not, Prof Ndulo is a respected person from the legal profession locally, regionally and internationally. He is an authority of some kind and what he has done is to help the lay people. His view gives a legal analysis.”
Hichilema said it were actions like the ones surrounding the Chiluba appeal, which undermined the fight against corruption.
“It is behaviour like that, it's actions like that. It's acts like what Prof Ndulo has commented about. The fight against corruption is gone under President Rupiah Banda and under the MMD government that fight is gone,” Hichilema said.
“We Zambians who care about the future of this country must regroup. This is not the time to register new political parties. This is the time to consolidate, to work together. You can't ask MMD to wage a fight against corruption. It means it's waging a fight against itself.”
Hichilema said it was undoubted that there was a political deal between President Banda and Chiluba, looking at Prof Ndulo's legal opinion.
“What is going on now is a confirmation of that. The deal was to use the Presidential office to selectively allow or discontinue a case, which obviously from a magistrate…it was only normal that it went to the High Court and if the High Court ruled and didn't handle the matter properly it would have been normal to appeal to the Supreme Court,” Hichilema said.
“If anybody felt that they are innocent why would they stop the appeal process? There is no doubt about that we all know that.”
Hichilema said Prof Ndulo's legal opinion was an indictment on the judiciary.
“There are a lot of good judges and magistrates out there but a few cases like this is definitely denting the image of the judiciary,” Hichilema said.
“I think your paper wrote about a particular case where a citizen went and laid it bare to the Supreme Court bench that they were corrupt, isn't it? So it's an indictment on the judiciary,” Hichilema said. “What we wish to see is a professional judiciary, a reasonably independent judiciary.
If citizens can stand before a bench and say what that individual said, one of the reasons is the examples of cases like those that have been mishandled. Unfortunately, it does dent the image of many judges out there, many good magistrates out there.”
Labels: CHILUBA, HAKAINDE HICHILEMA, MUNA NDULO
Read more...
Chinyama erred in law to acquit Chiluba - Prof Ndulo
By George Chellah
Tue 02 Mar. 2010, 04:00 CAT
Fredrick Chiluba (L) was charged with six counts of theft by a Public Servant
PROFESSOR Muna Ndulo has observed that Ndola High Court Registrar Jones Chinyama, sitting as magistrate erred in law in not finding former president Frederick Chiluba guilty on charges of theft last August.
According to Ndulo, a Zambian law Professor at United States’ Cornell University, magistrate Chinyama erred in law in finding that Chiluba's unsworn statement was sufficient in itself to rebut evidence established on oath.
Prof Ndulo made the observation in his opinion on the judgment delivered by Chinyama in the case of The People Vs Frederick Chiluba, Faustin Kabwe and Aaron Chungu.
“Fredrick Chiluba was charged with six counts of theft by a Public Servant contrary to sections 272 and 277 of the Penal Code, Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia.
He was president of Zambia when the alleged thefts were committed. The magistrate acquitted Frederick Chiluba on the grounds that although the monies used by Chiluba to pay his lawyers and children came out of the ZAMTROP government account and could be traced back to the Ministry of Finance, the prosecution had failed to prove that the monies were not his own monies put in a government account,” Prof Ndulo stated.
“The Magistrate accepted Chiluba's explanation that he had private monies in the Zamtrop account and he, Chiluba, believed that it was those monies which were used to make the relevant payments. Effectively, holding that Chiluba did not dishonestly use government monies.
The magistrate was not convinced that Chiluba did not have any monies of his own in the ZAMTROP government account.
“In coming to this conclusion, the trial magistrate relied on an unsworn statement that Chiluba made in which he, without disclosing the sources of those monies, claimed that he had a large amount ($8.5 million) of private monies in the ZAMTROP government account (JP 242).”
Prof Ndulo, who is also director at Cornell University's Institute for African Development and honorary Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town, stated that magistrate Chinyama erred in law in finding that an unsworn statement was sufficient in itself to rebut evidence established on oath.
“Even assuming that private money was deposited in the government account, there was no evidence to show that Chiluba was the intended beneficiary and there was no evidence to show that the money was paid into the Zamtrop account for a purpose other than a government purpose.
The necessary inference, in the light of government regulations concerning the use of government accounts and the status of money in them, is that the payments relied on by Chiluba were for a government purpose and/or intended for government beneficially,” Prof Ndulo stated.
“There was no evidence to displace that inference; Chiluba's unsworn statement, unsupported by evidence, was not capable of giving rise to an inference that the monies might be personal monies and/or intended for Chiluba beneficially.
The magistrate misdirected himself on the law relating to: the evidential value of unsworn statements; inferences in criminal cases; on the evidential burden of proof and on his treatment of members of the Task Force as witnesses with an interest to serve and therefore biased.”
Prof Ndulo stated that the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
“And the magistrate, having found that Chiluba had a case to answer, erred in law in not finding him guilty in the absence of proof to the contrary.
At the end of the day, all the magistrate had before him to rebut the Prosecution case which prima facie established the guilt of the accused was a mere unparticularised, uncorroborated, unsworn, untested assertion which, if true, would represent a gross breach of his fiduciary duty and itself raise the specter of corruption,” Prof Ndulo stated.
“The unsworn evidence made by Chiluba was not evidence in law and the court erred in relying on it to disprove the cogent evidence produced by the prosecution that 1) monies were taken by the accused from ZAMTROP, a government account, and 2) by law money in a government account is deemed to be government money.”
Labels: CHILUBA, CORRUPTION, COURTS, JONES CHINYAMA, MUNA NDULO
Read more...
There’s no contempt in Prof Ndulo’s article, maintains M’membe
By Maluba Jere
Sun 13 Dec. 2009, 04:01 CAT
POST editor-in-chief Fred M'membe on Friday told the Lusaka magistrates’ court that people who had political scores to settle with him should not do so by bringing down the standing of the country's judiciary.
This is in a matter where M'membe and The Post are charged with contempt of court arising from an article entitled ‘The Chansa Kabwela Case: A Comedy of Errors’ authored by US based professor of law Muna Ndulo, which was published in the newspaper's edition of August 27, 2009.
Giving evidence-in-chief led by defence lawyer Remmy Mainza, M'membe said it was this type of comedy of errors that threatened the integrity of the country's courts of law.
M'membe maintained that there was nothing contemptuous about Prof Ndulo's article.
“Who is Fred M'membe for the nation to risk the judicial process' integrity in his pursuant? Comedy of errors! In no way did Prof Ndulo bring down the standing of our courts,” M'membe said. “Our courts are not kangaroo courts. They are professional courts run by professional officers. And moreover, our whole judicial process has to awaken to the realities of internet. The discourse about court proceedings now and in the future will be very difficult to halt in a narrow manner.”
M'membe told magistrate David Simusamba that he was not a lawless citizen but a law-abiding one who had respect for the men and women who administered justice in the country's courts of law.
“It is out of that respect that today I'm and continue to be a member of the legal profession in this country. I am defending myself in this matter, I am giving evidence in this matter not because I am scared of going to prison. I have been there before,” M'membe said. “I have been dragged to court unjustifiably several times before and our courts freed me from cases that have been purely schemed to have me incarcerated. At one time, they got tired and jailed me without trial using Parliament. Again they were embarrassed, their action was found to be illegal by our courts of law.”
M'membe told the court that he would not have had problems apologising if he had committed an offence, adding that he would not have wasted the court's time and resources by going ahead with trial in the matter.
“If I have done anything wrong, if in any way I have offended our courts, being a lawyer and a journalist who should know better, I deserve the maximum sentence for this charge,” M'membe said. “I am convinced that no offence of contempt was committed by myself or indeed The Post itself. I thank you for giving me my day in court. Those who brought me here thought they were fixing me and they will live to regret this.”
M'membe said although he was on study leave at the time the article in question was published, he too would have published it had he been at the office.
He explained that he went through the article by Prof Ndulo and weighed it from two angles.
“I weighed it from a journalist's point of view and from a legal point of view. My conclusion was that if I was at the office at the time the decision to publish the article was made, I would have published it. I would have done exactly what they did,” M'membe said. “As a lawyer and legal counsel for The Post, I would have advised them to go ahead because there is no contempt whatsoever in this article. Those who are seeing contempt in it are seeing a mirage. They are excused because human beings sometimes see what they want to see, even if it doesn't exist. There was indeed a comedy of errors and the conclusion of the Chansa Kabwela case has clearly highlighted that it was a comedy of errors.”
M'membe observed that chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda's ruling in Kabwela's case clearly articulated issues and that was one of the best judgments delivered by the country's subordinate courts.
He told the court that Kabwela's case was a comedy of errors because it should not even have gone to court in the first place.
M'membe said the police were merely acting on orders from President Rupiah Banda.
“The comedy started with President Rupiah Banda himself at a press conference at State House. He gets emotionally charged on public television accusing The Post of being sick, morbid, queer and instructs the police to arrest us for those pictures,” M'membe said. “In one frame Mr Banda was a policeman, prosecutor and judge. The police swing into action without any proper investigations, without any proper analysis and effect arrests. The matter is taken to the DPP Director of Public Prosecutions who joins the circus, who joins the comedy and allows what should not have been allowed to proceed to court.
“In a clear abuse of the judicial process of our country, Chansa Kabwela is arrested and prosecuted. There is a problem here. If the process is unfair but correct, there is nothing our courts of law can do, there is nothing our honourable magistrates can do but to admit the matter. Accordingly, Chansa was prosecuted and acquitted accordingly on a matter that should not have entered our courts if not a comedy of errors.”
M'membe further said Prof Ndulo did not in any way ridicule the court, saying he was the highest criminal law authority in the country.
“Clearly your honour, this issue is not about one Fred M'membe trying to bring down the reputation of, the standing of our courts. It is an issue about those in control of the state trying to destroy one Fred M'membe but in the process are destroying the standing of our courts,” he said.
M'membe, who was asked to read parts of Prof Ndulo's article by the prosecutor, said he was not aware of any court order against The Post by magistrate Kafunda during Kabwela's trial.
“I have read the exhibits and there is no order restraining The Post but observations made by magistrate Kafunda. What constitutes an order of the court has a clear definition,” M'membe said. “It is not an arbitrary issue and it could not be because contempt of court is a very serious offence that can lead to an individual's loss of liberty.
“And moreover, your honour, what constitutes an order of the court was clearly defined by judge Wood in the case of Beatrice Nyambe v. Barclays Bank (Zambia) Limited reported in the Zambia Law Reports, Volume Two at page 195. An order of the court carries a criminal notice. There is nothing in this document, in the observations by magistrate Kafunda, that can be said in any way to constitute an order.”
M'membe said if mere court observations were turned into orders, many citizens could lose their liberties in a manner that could never be said to be fair or just.
He noted that even if one stretched magistrate Kafunda's observations, they would still not amount to a warning of the court.
“They were mere observations but very valid observations, very important observations for the administration of justice in our country,” M'membe said.
He testified that he saw Mwanza, prosecution witness number two, for the first time in court during his trial and that he never spoken to him or any other person from the police or state agencies tasked to “catch” him.
He explained that he was using the word “catch” because it was a phrase that was publicly uttered by the commander-in-chief of the Zambia Police Service, President Banda, when he was instructed the police to go after The Post over the matter of 'ponorgraphy' that led to these contempt proceedings.
“Professor Ndulo was very correct in describing the whole case as 'A Comedy of Errors. How do you lodge a compliant against a person you have not interviewed?” M'membe asked. “You are a policeman and prosecutor of 13 years, especially when the same prosecutor as he testified in this court attended the contempt proceedings before honourable Kafunda.”
He said it was difficult to think a prosecutor of 13 years could be so negligent in carrying out his duties.
M'membe told the court that his only reasonable conclusion was that Mwanza was blindly carrying out orders to “catch” the accused person.
At this point division prosecution officer (DPO) Frank Mumbuna objected, saying such sentiments should be left to the court and that M'membe was not capable to make opinions.
M'membe responded to Mumbuna's objection saying; “You brought me here to fix me. Let me have my day in court as they say and I will have it. This is the only place where I can get justice.”
But Mumbuna insisted that rules of procedure needed to be observed and it was not correct for M'membe to give his opinion even if it were his day in court.
Magistrate Simusamba overruled the objection, saying he would allow M'membe to say what he wanted provided he did not attack Mwanza's personality.
And during cross examination, magistrate Simusamba kept advising Mumbuna to ask questions clearly if he wanted to get the answers he expected from M'membe.
Magistrate Simusamba advised both M'membe and Mumbuna to avoid using unpalatable language in court during a heated cross examination.
This was after Mumbuna asked M'membe a question, which the latter said he had difficulties answering because it was nonsensical.
This angered Mumbuna who told the court that M'membe was insulting his intelligence and asked him to apologise.
But M'membe refused to apologise, forcing magistrate Simusamba to step in again and ask the prosecutor and the witness to calm down.
Mumbuna, who was emotional continued cross examining M'membe with the hope of ambushing him but the court reminded him that ambushing a witness was unacceptable although Mumbuna insisted that that was his way of cross examining.
Magistrate Simusamba again reminded Mumbuna that a witness answered questions during cross examination depending on how best they understood them.
He said it was the duty of the one cross examining to rephrase the question if he was not satisfied with the answer.
“I advised you that questions will be answered according to how they are understood,” he said. “If you listen to his M'membe answers, you will avoid arguing and we won't have to take so long.”
Asked by Mumbuna what evidence was there to prove that the police were directed to arrest and prosecute Kabwela, M'membe responded; “They arrested and prosecuted Kabwela and there is a ruling.”
But Mumbuna asked M'membe the same question, forcing magistrate Simusamba to state that Mumbuna seemed to have a different meaning of the word directive and also reminded him to avoid being confrontational.
Mumbuna then asked M'membe what evidence he had taken to court to show that President Banda directed the police to arrest Kabwela.
“That is irrelevant to this case. Why should I waste my time bringing in things irrelevant to my defence? We are not in Kabwela's case,” said M'membe.
When Mumbuna insisted, magistrate Simusamba agreed with M'membe that what he was asking for was irrelevant and wondered whether he wanted to cross examine a witness on his feelings.
Mumbuna then told the court that he should not be stopped from cross examining the accused on what he believed was raised in examination in chief and that he was abandoning his cross examination because he was being curtailed from doing that.
He also told the court that he wanted it to be on record that he had abandoned his cross examination under protest.
“I will not go further because the court has continuously blocked me from cross examining. I am not making progress, but I want it on record that I am abandoning my cross examination under protest,” Mumbuna said.
And M'membe responded: “You have just failed to cross examine me.”
The statement did not please magistrate Simusamba who told Mumbuna that he did not take kindly to such directives because everything in his court was on record.
M'membe's lawyer Mainza then observed that the defence was also being curtailed by the court on issues the court thought were irrelevant but they obliged.
He said Mumbuna was very senior and should not have stopped cross examining abruptly especially that the matter was a public hearing.
Mainza submitted that it was unacceptable to openly disagree with the court and advised Mumbuna to render an apology. However, Mumbuna did not apologise to the court for his conduct.
Magistrate Simusamba noted that since the commencement of trial in the matter, there had been a lot of emotions.
He said the court had inherent powers to punish offenders but that it was a learned court so it would try to restrain itself.
Magistrate Simusamba emphasized that officers of the court should not take advantage of the court and use it as a battle ground for emotions, saying they all owed a duty to justice.
The matter comes up on January 8, 14 and 15 for continued defence.
Labels: COURTS, FRED M'MEMBE, MUNA NDULO, THE POST
Read more...
Magistrate Kafunda performed his duties fearlessly – Prof Ndulo
By Mwala Kalaluka
Wed 18 Nov. 2009, 04:01 CAT
UNITED States University of Cornell-based Zambian Professor of Law, Muna Ndulo, has noted that Post news editor Chansa Kabwela’s acquittal in her ‘pornography’ case is a triumph for the rule of law and justice.
Commenting on Lusaka chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda’s dismissal of charges against Kabwela on Monday, Prof Ndulo yesterday said magistrate Kafunda performed his duties fearlessly and impartially and adhered to the law despite the international and national publicity that surrounded the case.
“To sustain a democracy in the modern world, a country needs an independent, impartial, and honest judiciary. Magistrate Kafunda’s actions prove that our dream for a democratic society in Zambia underpinned an independent judiciary need not be deferred,” Prof Ndulo said.
He said he was glad that Kabwela had been acquitted.
“He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach himself,” Prof Ndulo quoted notable intellectual Paine.
He said justice had prevailed.
“I am deeply gratified by the court’s judgment. Zambia should now put this behind it and advance to face the challenges that stand in the way of a better life for all our people,” said Prof Ndulo.
Kabwela was charged with one count of circulating obscene materials or things tending to corrupt public morals.
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, CHARLES KAFUNDA, LAZ, MUNA NDULO
Read more...
Home Business Sports Lifestyle Columns Court Letters World Comments Press Freedom Committee Education Post
M'membe, Mujuda and Prof Ndulo's judicial review over contempt currently taking place
Written by George Chellah
Wednesday, September 23, 2009 9:22:38 PM
THE matter in which Post editor-in-chief Fred M'membe, his deputy Sam Mujuda and Professor Muna Ndulo applied for judicial review after being cited for contempt by magistrate Charles Kafunda is currently being heard. Lusaka High Court judge Albert Wood adjourned the matter to this afternoon.
When the matter came up for inter-parte hearing last time, judge Wood adjourned it to enable him go through the case record in the subordinate court before hearing both parties.
Lawyer representing M'membe and Mujuda, George Chisanga, said judge Wood requested for the file from the magistrate court to familiarise himself with the details in the matter.
Chisanga said the state had applied that leave for judicial review be set aside and contempt proceedings at the magistrate's court should not be stayed.
"So, in his view, judge Wood thought it is imperative that he studies the file before he can hear both parties," Chisanga said. "So, the file will have to be retrieved from the subordinate court and the judge will study it."
Judge Wood recently directed and ordered that proceedings relating to the alleged contempt of court case involving M'membe, Mujuda and Prof Ndulo be stayed until after the hearing of the motion for judicial review.
According to an order granting leave to apply for judicial review filed in the Lusaka High Court at the principal registry, judge Wood directed that further proceedings relating to the case be stayed. Judge Wood's decision came in the wake of Lusaka chief resident magistrate Kafunda's move to issue a bench warrant for arrest against M'membe.
This follows a complaint by the prosecutors in the matter in which Post news editor Chansa Kabwela is facing one count of circulating obscene matters or things contrary to the law that an article authored by US based Professor of law Ndulo [The Chansa Kabwela case: a comedy of errors] and published in The Post newspaper edition of August 27, 2009 was contemptuous.
The Post editor-in-chief and the entire editorial staff were summoned to appear before court.The Post team, led by deputy managing director Mujuda appeared before court but magistrate Kafunda issued a bench warrant against M'membe, saying he was aware of the summons but did not appear before court.
However, M'membe is on study leave.The defence lawyers in the case argued among other issues, that the matter was improperly taken before court
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, COURTS, FRED M'MEMBE, MUNA NDULO
Read more...
M'membe, Mujuda and Prof Ndulo's judicial review over contempt currently taking place
Written by George Chellah
Wednesday, September 23, 2009 6:00:14 PM
THE matter in which Post editor-in-chief Fred M'membe, his deputy Sam Mujuda and Professor Muna Ndulo applied for judicial review after being cited for contempt by magistrate Charles Kafunda is currently being heard.
Lusaka High Court judge Albert Wood adjourned the matter to this afternoon.
When the matter came up for inter-parte hearing last time, judge Wood adjourned it to enable him go through the case record in the subordinate court before hearing both parties.
Lawyer representing M'membe and Mujuda, George Chisanga, said judge Wood requested for the file from the magistrate court to familiarise himself with the details in the matter.
Chisanga said the state had applied that leave for judicial review be set aside and contempt proceedings at the magistrate's court should not be stayed.
"So, in his view, judge Wood thought it is imperative that he studies the file before he can hear both parties," Chisanga said. "So, the file will have to be retrieved from the subordinate court and the judge will study it."
Judge Wood recently directed and ordered that proceedings relating to the alleged contempt of court case involving M'membe, Mujuda and Prof Ndulo be stayed until after the hearing of the motion for judicial review.
According to an order granting leave to apply for judicial review filed in the Lusaka High Court at the principal registry, judge Wood directed that further proceedings relating to the case be stayed. Judge Wood's decision came in the wake of Lusaka chief resident magistrate Kafunda's move to issue a bench warrant for arrest against M'membe.
This follows a complaint by the prosecutors in the matter in which Post news editor Chansa Kabwela is facing one count of circulating obscene matters or things contrary to the law that an article authored by US based Professor of law Ndulo [The Chansa Kabwela case: a comedy of errors] and published in The Post newspaper edition of August 27, 2009 was contemptuous.
The Post editor-in-chief and the entire editorial staff were summoned to appear before court.The Post team, led by deputy managing director Mujuda appeared before court but magistrate Kafunda issued a bench warrant against M'membe, saying he was aware of the summons but did not appear before court.
However, M'membe is on study leave.The defence lawyers in the case argued among other issues, that the matter was improperly taken before court
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, COURTS, FRED M'MEMBE, MUNA NDULO, SAM MUJUDA, THE POST
Read more...
Judge Wood adjourns judicial review hearing for M’membe to September 23
Written by Maluba Jere
Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:25:42 PM
Lusaka High Court judge Albert Wood yesterday adjourned to September 23 the matter in which Post editor-in-chief Fred M'membe, his deputy Sam Mujuda and Professor Muna Ndulo applied for judicial review after being cited for contempt by magistrate Charles Kafunda.
When the matter came up for inter-parte hearing, judge Wood adjourned it to enable him go through the case record in the subordinate court before hearing both parties.Lawyer representing M'membe and Mujuda, George Chisanga, said judge Wood requested for the file from the magistrate court to familiarise himself with the details in the matter.
Chisanga said the state had applied that leave for judicial review be set aside and contempt proceedings at the magistrate's court should not be stayed."So, in his view, judge Wood thought it is imperative that he studies the file before he can hear both parties," Chisanga said.
"So, the file will have to be retrieved from the subordinate court and the judge will study it."Judge Wood recently directed and ordered that proceedings relating to the alleged contempt of court case involving M'membe, Mujuda and Prof Ndulo be stayed until after the hearing of the motion for judicial review.According to an order granting leave to apply for judicial review filed in the Lusaka High Court at the principal registry, judge Wood directed that further proceedings relating to the case be stayed. Judge Wood's decision came in the wake of Lusaka chief resident magistrate Kafunda's move to issue a bench warrant for arrest against M'membe.
This follows a complaint by the prosecutors in the matter in which Post news editor Chansa Kabwela is facing one count of circulating obscene matters or things contrary to the law that an article authored by US based Professor of law Ndulo [The Chansa Kabwela case: a comedy of errors] and published in The Post newspaper edition of August 27, 2009 was contemptuous.The Post editor-in-chief and the entire editorial staff were summoned to appear before court.
The Post team, led by deputy managing director Mujuda appeared before court but magistrate Kafunda issued a bench warrant against M'membe, saying he was aware of the summons but did not appear before court.However, M'membe is on study leave.The defence lawyers in the case argued among other issues, that the matter was improperly taken before court.CK
Labels: ALBERT WOOD, COURTS, FRED M'MEMBE, MUNA NDULO, SAM MUJUDA
Read more...
COMMENT - On the usually shallow
BBC
coverage of African issues.
I am ready to appear before court - Prof Ndulo
Written by Malama Kennedy
Tuesday, September 01, 2009 10:34:46 PM
United States-based University of Cornell Professor of Law Muna Ndulo has said he is ready to travel and appear before chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda in a matter of contempt over the article he recently wrote on the ongoing trial of Post news editor Chansa Kabwela. And Prof Ndulo said the case in which Chansa stood charged for allegedly distributing obscene materials had damaged Zambia's reputation internationally.
In an interview with BBC's Focus on Africa, Prof Ndulo said once court summons were served on him, he would travel to attend the proceedings.
And in an interview with The Post, Prof Ndulo said: "I'm here [in the US], so legally the court has no jurisdiction. Once I receive the summons, I'll come [to Zambia]. I'm not afraid. In a country with high poverty levels, I think it was wrong for the government to instruct the police to investigate that matter, spending thousands of kwacha and spending so much time".
And Committeee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) executive director Joel Simon said summoning an entire editorial staff over an opinion piece exposes the absurd lengths authorities are going to harass The Post.
"With each judicial action, Zambian authorities make this into a bigger story worldwide."
Prof Ndulo is an authority on African legal systems, human rights, constitutions, election monitoring, international development and legal aspects of foreign investments in developing countries. After receiving his LL.B. from University of Zambia and LL.M. from Harvard Law School, Prof Ndulo was a public prosecutor for Zambia's Ministry of Legal Affairs. He was also Dean of University of Zambia School of Law and from 1986 to 1996 served the United Nations Commission for International Trade Law. From 1992 to 1994, he was political adviser to the UN Mission in South Africa.
Prof Ndulo joined Cornell Law School's faculty in 1996 and has continued to advise UN Missions in East Timor and Kosovo. He teaches international organisations and human rights institutions; the legal aspects of foreign investment in developing countries; and the common law and African legal systems. He is also director of Cornell University's Institute for African Development.
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, MUNA NDULO, THE POST
Read more...
Magistrate Kafunda summons Prof Ndulo, entire Post editorial staff over contempt complaint
Written by Mwala Kalaluka
Tuesday, September 01, 2009 4:29:29 PM
THE entire Post newspaper editorial staff has been summoned to appear before Lusaka chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda in a matter of contempt following the publication of US-based Zambian Professor of law Muna Ndulo's article on the Chansa Kabwela case.3
And magistrate Kafunda expressed disappointment that despite expressing his concern over the behaviour of political party cadres around the court premises, the situation had been left to deteriorate.
This is in a matter where, Kabwela had pleaded not guilty to one count of circulating obscene matters or things, contrary to section 177 1(b) of the Penal Code.
Kabwela, who is also Post news editor, stands charged with the offence of circulating obscene matters or things with a view of corrupting public morals.
Ruling on the state's application that The Post editor be cited for contempt following the newspaper's publication of an article by Cornell University's Prof Ndulo, entitled: ‘The Chansa Kabwela Case: A Comedy of Errors’, magistrate Kafunda yesterday said the state's application had merit. He said having had an opportunity to read Prof Ndulo’s article, he was satisfied that on its face, it contained contemptuous matter.
He said that being the case, he would cite the author of the said article, Prof Ndulo and the Post editor-in-chief.
“I direct summons to be issued to the said,” he said.
Magistrate Kafunda said he would summon the entire editorial staff of the newspaper in order to determine whether any of them might be linked to the contemptuous article.
“Summons will be returnable on Wednesday 2nd September 2009,” he said.
After the ruling, Lusaka division prosecutions officer (DPO), Frank Mumbuna said the state was fortified.
And magistrate Kafunda said he was disappointed with the events of last Friday where some MMD cadres engaged in violent behaviour on or about the court premises.
“I am disappointed that the situation was let to deteriorate,” he said.
Magistrate Kafunda said as a result of the violence, he had directed that no political party cadres would be allowed around and within the court premises.
“I direct police to effect the order,” he said. “The DPO and Lusaka Province police commanding officer are to see to it that the order is effected.”
Before Kabwela's case came up for continued hearing last Friday, Mumbuna applied to cite The Post editor for contempt.
“There is an application …bordering on repeated comments by The Post even when it's clear by the record before this honourable court that a similar concern was actually raised before this court,” Mumbuna said.
“We note, as state, with serious disappointment for The Post, in this case the editor, that despite this warning, The Post has continued violating, not only the law of the land but the warning given by this court.”
Mumbuna referred the court to The Post edition of August 27, 2009 and particularly to Prof Ndulo's article.
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, CHARLES KAFUNDA, COURTS, MUNA NDULO, THE POST
Read more...
Post journalists face contempt
Written by Mwala Kalaluka
Monday, August 31, 2009 3:58:46 PM
THE entire Post newspaper editorial staff has been summoned to appear before Lusaka chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda in a matter of contempt following the publication of Zambian US-based Professor of law Muna Ndulo’s article on the Chansa Kabwela case. And magistrate Kafunda expressed disappointment that despite expressing his concern over the behaviour of political party cadres around the court premises, the situation had been left to deteriorate.
This is in a matter where, Kabwela had pleaded not guilty to one count of circulating obscene matters or things, contrary to section 177 1(b) of the penal code.
Kabwela, 29, a journalist by occupation, stands charged with the offence of circulating obscene matters or things with a view of corrupting public morals.
Particulars of the offence were that Kabwela, between June 1 and 10, 2009 in Lusaka did circulate two obscene photographs tending to corrupt public morals.
Ruling on the state’s application that the Post editor be cited for contempt following the news paper’s publication of an article by Cornell University’s Prof Ndulo, entitled: The Chansa Kabwela Case: A Comedy of Errors, magistrate Kafunda yesterday said the state’s application had merit.
Magistrate Kafunda said having had an opportunity to read Prof Ndulo’s article, he was satisfied that on its face it contained contemptuous matter.
He said that being the case he would cite the author of the said article, Prof Ndulo and Post editor-in-chief Fred Mmembe.
“That being the case I will therefore cite the author of the said article for contempt, together with the editor-in-chief,” magistrate Kafunda said. “I direct summons to be issued to the said.”
Magistrate Kafunda said he would summon the entire editorial staff of the newspaper in order to determine whether any of them might be linked to the contemptuous article.
“Summons will be returnable on Wednesday 3rd September 2009.
After the ruling Lusaka Division Prosecution Officer, Frank Mumbuna said the state was fortified.
And magistrate Kafunda said he was disappointed with the events of Friday, August 28, 2009 where some political party cadres engaged in violent behaviour on or about the court premises.
“I am disappointed that the situation was let to deteriorate,” he said.
Magistrate Kafunda said as the result of the violence, he has directed that no political party cadres would be allowed around and within the court premises.
“I direct police to effect the order,” he said. “The DPO and Lusaka Province police commanding officer are to see to it that the order is effected.”
Before the matter came up for continued hearing before Kafunda last Friday, Mumbuna told the court that the state had an application.
“There is an application, your worship, bordering on repeated comments by the Post even when its clear by the record before this honourable court that a similar concern was actually raised before this court,” Mumbuna said with emphasis.
“We note, as state, with serious disappointment for the Post, in this case the editor, that despite this warning, the Post has continued violating, not only the law of the land but the warning given by this court.”
Mumbuna then referred the court to the Post edition of August 27, 2009 and particularly to an article authored by Prof Ndulo on the paper’s page 20, which he said was entitled Kabwela’s Case: A Comedy of Errors.
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, COURTS, MUNA NDULO, THE POST
Read more...
Prof Ndulo’s article attracts contempt complaint
Written by Mwala Kalaluka
Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:35:12 PM
UNITED States’ University of Cornell Professor of Law, Muna Ndulo's description of Post news editor Chansa Kabwela's 'pornography' case as a ‘Comedy of Errors’ yesterday compelled the state to ask the court to cite The Post editor for contempt.
This is in a matter where Kabwela has pleaded not guilty to one count of circulating obscene matters or things tending to corrupt public morals, contrary to section 177 1(b) of the Penal Code.
Particulars of the offence were that Kabwela, between June 1 and 10, 2009 in Lusaka did circulate two obscene photographs tending to corrupt public morals.
Before the matter came up for continued hearing before Lusaka chief resident magistrate Charles Kafunda, Lusaka Division prosecution officer, Frank Mumbuna, told the court that the state had an application.
"There is an application, your worship, bordering on repeated comments by The Post even when it's clear by the record before this honourable court that a similar concern was actually raised before this court," Mumbuna said with emphasis.
"We note, as state, with serious disappointment for The Post, in this case the editor, that despite this warning, The Post has continued violating, not only the law of the land but the warning given by this court."
Mumbuna then referred the court to The Post edition of August 27, 2009 in which an article authored by Prof Ndulo was published on page 20 entitled ‘The Chansa Kabwela Case: A Comedy of Errors’.
"We have been greatly touched by the following comment... 'that it is currently before the court is a result of errors of judgment on the part of the President and the police. The situation is exacerbated by the failure to stop the prosecution on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions'," Mumbuna read. " 'No other case has damaged Zambia's image and standing as a tolerant and democratic country'."
Mumbuna quoted Prof Ndulo's comments that the average person, in Zambia while having no doubt being shocked and disgusted by the pictures, would not regard such pictures as being prurient.
"The author qualifies this by including, 'instead the pictures should lead to outrage and anger at those who were not making maximum effort to end the strike," he said. "The other serious comment states, 'the case cannot be supported by the definition of obscenity. The distribution of the pictures was limited to a small section of leaders and its objectives were not to corrupt morals'."
Mumbuna accused Prof Ndulo of passing judgment on behalf of the court.
"The article goes on to say Ms Chansa Kabwela, who is an accused before you, explained that the pictures were tearfully brought to the newspaper by the husband of the woman in the pictures in the hope that their publication might avert more tragedies," he said. "Qualification is given by this author."
Mumbuna said the article in contention gave directives to the court when the author stated that the Kabwela saga should be brought to a rapid resolution in order to end the unnecessary depletion of resources and the tarnishing of Zambia's image abroad.
He said the author stated that the case should be brought to a speedy resolution and end the pain felt by Zambians, as they endured the unnecessary court process.
"This case has tarnished Zambia's name abroad, according to the author of this article," Mumbuna said. "I note with interest that while this comment has been accepted by the editor of the paper, The Post newspaper, at page 19 at the end of the paper it says the editor reserves the right to edit letters for publication."
Mumbuna said The Post editor had the right not to publish Prof Ndulo's article, more so that the court had given directives to The Post editor and the newspaper to avoid commenting on matters that are before court.
"We refer this court to section 116 (1) (d)," he said. "We feel that the comment by The Post, through its editor, has violated the provisions of section 116 by committing contempt and The Post must show cause why it should not be rightly cited for contempt, especially after the court had given its position."
Mumbuna said the state felt that The Post's action undermined the integrity of the court.
"We also feel, your honour, that in any journalism field or profession the observance of the law comes within such training and for the editor of The Post newspaper to have closed his eyes to such realities would be an act of stubbornness for which the court must provide protection," he said. "The comment by The Post newspaper, which goes on to say 'as Zambians endure this unnecessary court process' is an act of indiscipline, which might jeopardise the proceedings of this trial, to which the court must protect the state."
Mumbuna said it would also be prudent for the court to protect its own integrity adding that the application was meant to protect both the state and the accused person.
"The comments and the cases put forward before this article goes to show assumption of authority by an unauthorised person or persons," he said.
Mumbuna argued that the title of the article belittled the court and those that were involved in the trial.
"Because the state has not been given adequate time to justify on the comments that have been written by The Post, we will prove to the world that in a case of obscene, intention is not necessary," Mumbuna said before magistrate Kafunda advised him to stick to the issue. "Judgment has been provided for the court and this article is capable of influencing the outcome of this case. We will be quick to say that the editor of the newspaper, The Post itself, must be cited for contempt under section 116, as provided by the law."
Defence lawyer Remmy Mainza said they could not comment on the application because they were not on record as being lawyers for The Post but for Kabwela.
He said they would need to get instructions from The Post if they were to comment on the matter.
Magistrate Kafunda said he would need to study the comment complained of and the submissions from the state before making his ruling on Monday August 31, 2009.
Labels: CHANSA KABWELA, MUNA NDULO, THE POST
Read more...
