Court rebuffs DPP on Section 65 case

The High Court has thrown out the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) application to be involved in a case on the Section 65 legislation which limits MPs from crossing the floor in Parliament.

The party wrote the Speaker to declare vacant seats of 46 MPs, arguing they crossed the floor which is contrary to Section 65.

However, the Speaker threw the case out saying it lacked sufficient evidence. The DPP then made a fresh application which forced MPs, including Ackim Mwanza, Nasrini Pillane, Joseph Tembo, John Bande, Jones Chingola, Juliana Mphande to get an injunction, restraining the Speaker from acting on a second application by the DPP.

Their argument was that the Speaker could not act on the matter he already acted upon.

The court ordered an interpartes hearing and the DPP, through lawyer Kalekeni Kaphale, made an application to join the case as amicus curie (friend of court).

But lawyer for the MPs, Victor Gondwe, opposed the application on the premises that the Attorney General (AG) was the Speaker’s legal representative as a public authority and that the DPP had not shown sufficient interest.

In his ruling on Tuesday, Justice Dingiswayo Madise objected to the DPP application, saying it showed lack of sufficient interest in the case. 

Madise noted that the DPP wanted to join the case to be heard as a petitioner who moved the Speaker to invoke Section 65.

“They [DPP] simply want to be heard, claiming that they are directly affected by the outcome of the case,” said Madise.

He then ordered the hearing of interpartes summons and originating motion for judicial review within 21 days.

Kaphale said on Wednesday he has already sent a notice of appeal of the judgement.