The Legal Affairs Committee (LAC) of Parliament and other stakeholders are planning to engage Chief Justice Rezine Mzikamanda and other senior members of the Judiciary over continued delays to issue judgements.
The stakeholders argued in separate interviews last week that certain disputes are inherently time-sensitive, as such, any unjustifiable delays may render the eventual outcomes academic, ineffective or even useless.
In a written response, Parliamentary Legal Affairs Committee chairperson Gilbert Khonyongwa said litigation is often costly, emotionally draining and time-consuming, as such prolonged delays only compound these difficulties.
“In some cases, parties may suffer irreparable prejudice before a judgement is delivered, thereby undermining the very purpose of seeking judicial intervention.
“The Judiciary is also faced with resource constraints, including inadequate support systems and infrastructure necessary to enable judicial officers to perform their duties efficiently and within prescribed timelines,” he said.
However, Khonyongwa said while many judicial officers work hard and continue to serve diligently despite these difficult conditions, there may also be isolated instances where individual performance falls below the expected standards.
Other cases that have suffered such delays include an accident claim involving former Chess Association of Malawi president Susan Namangale who has been waiting for judgement for over 15 years since the conclusion of hearing.
Another court user, Rodwell Zimba, 89, has endured a 28-year wait for a court verdict after all testimonies and submissions were concluded.
Cost of delays
Despite pronouncements that a judgement should be delivered within 90 days, Malawians continue enduring longer periods before cases are concluded.
In some cases, the delays stem from scheduling of hearing sessions, issuing judgements and providing written ‘full’ judgments as some members of the bench simply issue summary judgements.
Commenting on the issue, Centre for Human Rights Education, Advice and Assistance executive director Victor Mhango said the situation is even more serious for accused persons who remain on remand awaiting the determination of their cases.
“This raises serious human rights concerns, including violations of the right to liberty, the presumption of innocence and the right to be tried within a reasonable time.
“Such delays also contribute to prison congestion and place unnecessary burdens on correctional facilities. Access to justice is not merely about having courts available; it is also about ensuring that cases are heard and determined within a reasonable time,” he said.
Malawi Human Rights Commission (MHRC) director of political and civil rights Peter Chisi agreed with the observation, stating that lengthy detention on remand subjects suspects to punishment before trial.
So what’s next?
LAC’s Khonyongwa said his committee has several options which will be carefully considered, including engaging the Chief Justice and other senior members of the Judiciary to better understand the challenges and explore practical solutions.
“Depending on the findings and circumstances, the committee may also consider instituting an inquiry into the delays in the administration of justice.
“The objective would be to establish the underlying causes of these delays, identify any systemic weaknesses and recommend lasting and practical reforms that will enhance efficiency, accountability and timely delivery of justice for all Malawians,” he said.
In an emailed response on Thursday, Office of the Ombudsman acting principal public relations officer Ruth Lupanga said they continue to work collaboratively with the Judiciary in dealing with such matters.
On his part, Chisi said MHRC has embarked on a documentation exercise through a project funded by the Irish Rule of Law Consortium to take stock of all detainees that have been on remand for more than three years.
“We hope that the data generated will be used to engage in dialogue with the Judiciary to come up with actions for addressing the delays, including the possibility of holding camp courts,” he said.
Mhango suggested strengthening judicial capacity through the appointment of additional judges, magistrates and support staff, including establishing and enforcing clear timelines for the delivery of judgements and written decisions.
He said other interventions include enhancing judicial performance monitoring and accountability mechanisms while safeguarding judicial independence; strengthening legal aid and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms to reduce pressure on courts; expanding the use of digital case management systems to track pending cases and delayed judgements as well as prioritising old and long-pending cases through special review initiatives.
Judiciary speaks out
Judiciary spokesperson Ruth Mputeni said in a written response that over the years, they have been strengthening case management practices, increasing the use of digital technologies and establishing specialised divisions and courts.
She said they have also been improving judicial and staff capacity through continuous training and closely monitoring court performance through administrative and supervisory mechanisms.
Recently, Malawi Law Society raised “serious concern” with the 21-year period it took the Judiciary to conclude the appeal case involving the Reserve Bank of Malawi and the Attorney General against Finance Bank of Malawi.
