By Kahlatswayo Cele
Given certain conditions, one as an individual, may choose, concerning a rotten apple, whether to eat it wholly, cut off the rotten portion and proceed to eat only the unaffected portion or simply throw away the whole apple into the rubbish bin, whatever the case may be. However, one as an individual has no basis whatsoever, concerning the same apple, if certain conditions prevail, to impose what a whole people should do with it. It would suffice, if one had a genuine public concern, to simply warn the public about the true state of the apple!
On the surface details, Mr. Stephen Lungu, the current President of the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ), despite the seemingly bona fide appeal, is unfairly selective as to what he intends the public to know what their ‘Professional opinion’ is when commenting on the plunder case surrounding allegations against former Zambian President, Dr. FTJ Chiluba, in particular, with regard to what LAZ’s obligation is to the public. If LAZ’s main and honest concern is to serve ‘public interest’ then the public deserves from them unobtrusive, unbiased, fair and balanced amount of commentary.
Regarding Justice Hamaundu’s London Court Judgement, on one hand, LAZ via Mr. Lungu, chooses through the media to announce what it conceives to be Its obligation and duty to ‘public interest’, but on the other hand , forgets that, for instance, of equal public concern and interest, and of significant bearing on the overall case, is LAZ’s position regarding the allegations of professional misconduct against the lawyer who had been the leading advocate for the prosecution.
As far as certain sections of the public are concerned, this Lawyer had allegedly been given room to ‘usurp the powers of the DPP’, giving reason to believe that the whole process of justice was circumvented, putting to question the very motive underlying the investigations and as such the very credibility of the case. LAZ appears to have deliberately avoided this issue.
This is the aspect underwritten in their (LAZ) selective public comments. One wonders the sapience in choosing to be so selective as to risk to be seen to be biased.
To follow Mr. Lungu’s inference to ‘public interest’, it should not be left out of the arena by LAZ what their stance is concerning the allegations of misconduct against this leading figure, in retrospect of the whole process, which in many peoples opinion, is of significant ‘public interest’. Over this matter, they have remained ostensibly mute. This is the obvious and deductable premise for this article.
Mr. Lungu in publicly attacking and making sweeping statements against the decisions of the Judiciary does incredible injustice to LAZ’s reputation as a non partisan Professional body and risks plunging the nation into a constitutional crisis. He has brought unnecessary suscpicion over what LAZ really stands for in its current make-up.
LAZ as a Professional Body has the obligation to dispel suscpicion by tapering their public statements with Professional integrity, not feeding fire to the flames, as they do when they publicly attack Judge Hamaundu’s judgement. They have, however, been evidently quiet concerning some of the ‘hanging’ issues which could potentially impact public opinion.
It appears inordinate yet selective, how on their part (LAZ), pop in and pop out, choosing only when it is convenient to make public what their ‘Professional opinion’ is, deliberately it would seem, using latitude, to stir and influence the public towards their stance, denying the public vital knowledge to make informed and independent conclusions. This is not in line with the spirit and aim of statutory mandate Mr. Lungu alludes to when he toes this ‘public interest’ line.
It is not the aim to impugn anyone. However, this inconsistency in LAZ at best could be downright naivity, to the extent of exploitation, at worst professional impudence on the part of Mr. Lungu.
[pullquote]It appears inordinate yet selective, how on their part (LAZ), pop in and pop out, choosing only when it is convenient to make public what their ‘Professional opinion’ is, deliberately it would seem, using latitude, to stir and influence the public towards their stance, denying the public vital knowledge to make informed and independent conclusions. This is not in line with the spirit and aim of statutory mandate Mr. Lungu alludes to when he toes this ‘public interest’ line.[/pullquote]
Where can one draw the line?
As far as LAZ is concerned, what determines that one aspect of the case is of ‘public interest’, requiring their specific public comment, and another is not? The whole approach LAZ has taken is uninspiring, removing rather than adding to the process of justice.
It is easy to sense obscurity as to what ‘public interest’ is, in as far as what Mr. Lungu understands his institution’s mandate to ‘public interest’ is. But, this is also the platform and basis on which it seems, Mr. Lungu and disgruntled elements in LAZ, choose to launch their insidious campaign from. Otherwise, why is Mr. lungu being so selective in his comments?
What is this ‘Public Interest’? Is it not Justice. Mob justice? Most people can understand to a great extent if these lopsided comments and attacks come from sections of the private media who ‘play to the gallery’ by the very nature of their engagement, but for a Professional Body such as LAZ to engage in the same, is inexcusable. Perhaps one could blame the nature of ‘Part-time’ arrangement LAZ office bearers operate under such that they do not give total and due dillegence to the issues that confront them and as a result, this ineptitude. Compare the effort and concern the Justice Hamaundu gave to page his 200+ judgement report only to be questioned via a single paged document prepared and drafted overnight. What insolence!
[pullquote]What is this ‘Public Interest’? Is it not Justice. Mob justice?[/pullquote]
With this attitude, it is easy to understand why our governance and democracy system sometimes gives way to be seen as ‘mere metaphor’ for when it is absolutely expedient and imperative to give confidence and credence, the players are engaged in mere rhetorical and impressionable activity. LAZ has certainly not given their best effort in this matter despite the influence they want to exert.
Therefore the conjecture that Mr. Lungu is in complicity in using LAZ as a platform and tool hijacked for political and/or other agenda for certain interested elements is not far fetched. Their manner of comments on the ‘London Court Judgement’ has certainly raised genuine concern over their professionalism (lack of it). LAZ as a professional body must avoid to be seen to be taking sides if it is to remain credible and above reproach.
Every case in the public courts is of significant impact and influence, as are the decisions out of them, which are the basis or outcome of Judicial precedence, differing only in degree.
Mr. Cele you are a waste of space. I will not dignify this article with a response.
LAZ’s integrity at this point in responding to the issue of appealing the Court is in their playing the role of a watchdog for the benefit of the people, who would otherwise be short-changed by the corrupt government’s collaboration with a supposedly honoured person to pass a questionable decision, which clearly exposes the integrity of the judiciary.
Government’s corruption is now rubbing and stiking on the judiciary. Putting our law courts in very bad and compromised political light.
We need a very urgent reform of our judiciary, so that it will be impartial, and serve the interests of the Zambian public.
Hey LT,
where is my comment?
I think I miss the ZWD who don’t drop comments for no apparent reason.
My thoughts and time have been wasted by non-posting by LT.
If it appears on LT, its pro MMD. One need not be a lawyer to see what is happening in the judiciary. These mistakes will cost the same people who are making them when its their time to run to the courts. Abuse of office is getting worse in the Judiciary, where, people are being victimised using legal instruments of the state. I have had a very bad experience of conivance by an institution with the help of their lawyer in wanting to ruin my life. So Mr Cele, you have no point in what you are saying. LAZ has done a good job, in fact they they needed to do more!!
i told u that u dont need to be intelligent to become a lawyer. Anyone can. I know a lot of them
Looks like the writer was paid some money to write this waffle.
Kahlatswayo Cele, hai, una hlanya! You seem schooled enough from the way you are able to regurgitate fake intellectual verbature but your intellectual nudity is clearly exposed by your apparent stance that arises from a pre-set position, from which you go on to fish for reasons to dress it using fake intellectual bombastic verbature that lacks not only coherence but largely devoid of logic and intellectual substance. If you want to be smart, read what Roger Chongwe wrote and stop such silly snobbish charades characterisitc of s party cadre. You know, no matter how well dressed a skank may be, it will still remain a skank and smell like one. Cele, you are a skank of the worst ordour.
Well, Kahlatswayo Cele, if you find what Judge Hamaundu, Bwezani Banda, his Attorney General Shonga and Vuvuzela Shikapwasha saying to be “unobtrusive, unbiased, fair and balanced amount of commentary”, then I swear you are mad in the head. And by the way, why do you carry the same name as the late Shaka Zulu movie actor? You bet this is Bizwell Banda, the son of Bwezani. This kind of writing is very akin to that squint eyed son of Bwezani.
What is the main issue in this article?
I ask so because I have wasted my time reading a meaningless article.
Bwana editor, please do not publish articles without substance.
The author of this article is realy dull and mentaly backward. He has said nothing and one wonders as to why it is too long while it has no substance in it. Its the most useless article on LT so far where the writter goes round the same invisible point he percieves LAZ to have failed to perform.
Yes, we know the author of this article by his real name…..only such dull, opportunists and boot-bum lickers can say judge Hamahundu was right given that he had gone against his precedence.
I dont know where Zambia is headed.
The person who wrote this is very right because LAZ seems to be working as a branch of the post newspapers there are people who have been let off with serious crimes by the courts in Zambia but they kept quiet, the should help us recover the money that was paid to Nchito and his lawyer friends for doing nothing as per AG’S report. LAZ should stop to be selective in the way the go about their business.
Bull’s eye #1!!!
‘SELECTIVE COMMENTS’, ‘MOB JUSTICE” AND BEING SILENT WHEN IT THE RIGHT TIME TO ADVISE,OR BETTER STILL” IN PUBLIC INTEREST WHEN YOU MEAN IN”THE INTEREST OF LAWYERS’ POCKETS.LUNGU IS LIKE A SNAKE WITH TWO HEADS,IT WILL ONLY GO ON THE DIRECTION OF THE FIRST HEAD WHICH WAKES UP. MR CELE VERY GOOD OBSERVATION INDEED. KEEP IT UP.THOSE WHO SUFFER FROM A DISEASE CALLED ”PARALYSIS OF ANALYSIS” WILL FIND YOUR ARTICLE EMPTY.
Well, where is Rupiah Banda’s integrity? He pops in and out of the country like a lizard popping in and out of a hole!
#14..This article is definitely empty and full of falsehoods because it represents the views of those who condone corruption.It is only a fool who is blind to fact the judiciary in Zambia is just a political tool of the government in power.Just because LAZ is exposing the Zambian Judiciary for what it truly is does not mean that they are being selective.When 2011 elections are over and a new government takes over,the misdeeds of all three arms of government shall be known to all.If there is anyone who suffers from “Paralysis of Analysis”,it is very likely yourself.
” Mr. Lungu in publicly attacking and making sweeping statements against the decisions of the Judiciary does incredible injustice to LAZ’s reputation as a non partisan Professional body and risks plunging… ”
Partisan garbage. The Lusaka Times uses it’s platform to *denounce* the head of the Law Association of Zambia?
Just because it is election time, doesn’t mean that the LT needs to become a platform for MMD cadres.
LAZ, as a professional body must sue this cockroach for libel. Have you ever heard of the LAZ Act and the professional duty that it gives to Lawyers as a professional grouping? You are beneath p.u.b.i.c. lice, Cele.
Authur is damn Smart in that he is infact a perfect example of a bootlicker.
His language is somewhat Kunderlized,He is damn good at irony .Zambians have really been taken for a ride.
Mother Zambia.
We are even failing to get ourselves pamela.
One meal a day is even a miracle for our families .Kaunda and the UNIP were defeated mainly du to the rise in mealie meal prices .Today we cannot afford even a well meaningful mining job as college graduates .All we had is gone and yet we still move with our bellies full of gas ,while stories of development ,investment and the like are are all over the papers.
Stories of corruption and so on the front page.Actually whenever i listen to radio or read any media publication and find the word corruption, what comes into my mind is a vision of a high heeled semi pala-man changing appearances and preaching in some of our neighbouring churches ,denouncing evil,saying he is the chosen one and has been redeamed.
I think we need to open a new chapter
hahahahaha
….you ve written well # 8and 9. it seems you know this skank.
You have made my monday morning sensitional laughter.
Bauze Ngozi’s comments are meaningful that Cele’s long rubbish opinion. This is the same opninion LT editors hold because they failed to advise Cele to stop thinking the way he was doing his article but found it to be plausible. Ma Rubbish!!!
You guys, both from both sides of the coin. LAz represents lawyers both for Chiluba and the prosecution (some of them) these guys need jobs to do. If the case is closed they they have no Job. If this case went on to the supreme court lawyers from both side will cash in BIG. Cant your see how fast they are with appeals so that the case takes another 10 years to finish and they will continue cashing in BIG
Interesting and well written article Mr. Cele.
A judgement exists (precedent) which clearly shows that Nchito was in order to immediately appeal without recourse to the DPP. Anyone saying this is misconduct does not know what they are talking about. We have courts all over Zambia being prosecuted and decisions whether to appeal or not are made without DPP’s input. THINK!
kasuma aka kantu ka lungu. handsome man
# 25 You have cracked my ribs, hope your female so that ukalyepo LIVE.
24
Squealer – Again you have made my day
Musonda deposited the cheque the same day but it bounced because she only had K2 million available to clear a cheque of K10 million. Changwe’s cheque to Musonda bounced because she didn’t have sufficient funds in the account, she had overdrawn her account. If she had sufficient funds in her account to cover that cheque of K10 million, her cheque to Musonda wouldn’t have bounced. If the police’s reasoning is accepted, then very few, if any, would be prosecuted for bouncing a cheque. We say this because if one has K23 million in his or her account on a particular day, one can issue as many cheques as possible on that same day to as many people as possible as long as none of them is more than K23 million, and whichever cheque bounces after that, it is no offence. This is nonsense. It…
#28 Indeed if she had that kind of money how did the cheque bounce?
the judiciary cannot hide behind immunities and autonomies to promote injustice. they have a responsibility to the people not only the executive. not only are they reqiured to be fair but also have to be seen to be so. otherwise they forfeit all the above privileges with the danger of throwing the country into chaos. and LAZ cannot sit idly.
i am a man btw, i have to be honest, the young man is good looking bane
Another hired gun by the MMD and FTJ. Why should they force the acquittal down our throats? N why do we have the Court of Appeal in the form of the supreme court if we cant even appeal? If Kafupi is truly innocent, why he face the supreme court?