The Malawi Law Society (MLS) says it will join a judicial review case challenging a court injunction that blocked Speaker of Parliament Sameer Suleman from forming 12 joint ad hoc committees to probe government operations.
MLS will participate as amicus curiae (a friend of the court) to provide an independent and neutral perspective alongside submissions from the parties to the case.
MLS will participate as amicus curiae (a friend of the court) to provide an independent and neutral perspective alongside submissions from the parties to the case.
MLS president Davis Njobvu said the society’s decision touches on fundamental constitutional and administrative law issues.
“Section 64 of the Legal Education and Legal Practitioners Act provides that one of the objects of the MLS is to protect matters of public interest that are incidental or ancillary to the law. The matter before the courts raises important constitutional questions, including the doctrine of separation of powers, Parliament’s oversight role, and broader issues of rule of law, transparency and accountability,” Njobvu said.
He added that the society has a responsibility to act as a guardian of the law.
“We have a clear mandate to act as a public watchdog, guardian and custodian of the law when it comes to constitutionalism, good governance and citizens’ rights,” Njobvu said.
The development follows concerns from the Executive over the legality of Suleman’s decision to order 12 investigations into governance failures affecting public service delivery.
Chief Secretary to the Government Justin Saidi said in a statement that while the Executive respects separation of powers, the authority to establish parliamentary committees rests with Parliament and cannot be exercised unilaterally by the Speaker.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) also questioned the legality of the committees, with secretary general Peter Mukhito voicing concern.
Private lawyer Benedicto Kondowe explained that the Constitution deliberately separates governance and oversight.
“Parliament may investigate, scrutinise, summon and recommend, but it cannot administer the government. The Executive may govern and implement policy, but it cannot shield itself from parliamentary oversight. Where either arm is alleged to have crossed the constitutional boundary, Section 9 places interpretation and enforcement with the Judiciary,” Kondowe said.
A concerned citizen, Austin Mkoka, filed the urgent judicial review application against Suleman and Parliament, asking the court to determine whether the Legislature has constitutional authority to establish the committees and conduct investigations.
Mkoka also obtained an injunction halting the probes until the court rules on their legality.
Through his lawyer, Noel Supedi, Mkoka requested the court to stay the Speaker’s decision pending interpretation of Parliament’s powers.
Supedi said he had been given 14 days from filing to submit written arguments, after which a date would be set for the judicial review hearing
MLS president Davis Njobvu said the society’s decision touches on fundamental constitutional and administrative law issues.
“Section 64 of the Legal Education and Legal Practitioners Act provides that one of the objects of the MLS is to protect matters of public interest that are incidental or ancillary to the law. The matter before the courts raises important constitutional questions, including the doctrine of separation of powers, Parliament’s oversight role, and broader issues of rule of law, transparency and accountability,” Njobvu said.
He added that the society has a responsibility to act as a guardian of the law.
“We have a clear mandate to act as a public watchdog, guardian and custodian of the law when it comes to constitutionalism, good governance and citizens’ rights,” Njobvu said.
The development follows concerns from the Executive over the legality of Suleman’s decision to order 12 investigations into governance failures affecting public service delivery.
Chief Secretary to the Government Justin Saidi said in a statement that while the Executive respects separation of powers, the authority to establish parliamentary committees rests with Parliament and cannot be exercised unilaterally by the Speaker.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) also questioned the legality of the committees, with secretary general Peter Mukhito voicing concern.
Private lawyer Benedicto Kondowe explained that the Constitution deliberately separates governance and oversight.
“Parliament may investigate, scrutinise, summon and recommend, but it cannot administer the government. The Executive may govern and implement policy, but it cannot shield itself from parliamentary oversight. Where either arm is alleged to have crossed the constitutional boundary, Section 9 places interpretation and enforcement with the Judiciary,” Kondowe said.
A concerned citizen, Austin Mkoka, filed the urgent judicial review application against Suleman and Parliament, asking the court to determine whether the Legislature has constitutional authority to establish the committees and conduct investigations.
Mkoka also obtained an injunction halting the probes until the court rules on their legality.
Through his lawyer, Noel Supedi, Mkoka requested the court to stay the Speaker’s decision pending interpretation of Parliament’s powers.
Supedi said he had been given 14 days from filing to submit written arguments, after which a date would be set for the judicial review hearing
