PF chairperson for legal affairs Hon Brian Mundubile says removing article 52(4) is not meant to advance President Edgar Lungu’s interest but to avoid electoral confusion or conflicts in regards to nomination petitions.
He said Article 52(4) which states that a person may challenge, before a court or tribunal, as prescribed, the nomination of a candidate within seven days of the close of nomination and the court shall hear the case within twenty-one days of its lodgement is retrogressive and can disadvantage any candidate across the spectrum whether ruling or opposition and is likely to be abused by those who feel disadvantaged for not being adopted.
Speaking to Smart Eagles in an interview, Hon Mundubile notes that maintaining article 52 cannot even affect President Lungu because the matter concerning his eligibility has already been settled in the courts of law saying those that still want to petition can go ahead now if they still seek clarity on the matter.
“You can’t tailor a constitution around an individual. We know that beyond 2026 President Lungu will not be eligible but you want to return article 52(4) for purposes of petitioning President Lungu’s nomination in 2021 when the article will be in the constitution for a long time to come and will disadvantage others councilors, MP’s and future presidents. So we are saying no because that’s not how you frame a constitution” Hon Mundubile further explained.
Hon Mundubile said maintaining article 52 will breed mischief because anyone can wake up and petition any candidate of frivolous grounds.
“Why should we have a law that generates confusion, you have a situation where aspirants are competing and one has been picked and adopted and all the other one has to do is to spoil for them through a petition on frivolous grounds such that he loses 21 days because the matter has to be determined with 21 days coupled with the earlier 7 days given within which to petition” he explained.
He says constitutional amendments are not meant to create conflicts but to provide a level playing field and to settle cases as opposed to raising new ones.
And Hon Mundubile has challenged those opposing Bill 10 to substantiate their arguments through issue-based debates as opposed to shunning debate platforms such as parliament by walking out adding that a constitution is a national document that requires everyone’s participation regardless of political affiliations and interests.
Desperately fighting to shamelessly legalize illegalities.
Honourable Mundubile i beg to differ with you though i am not a lawyer. On the contrary article 54 (2) was put there in our constitution to ensure that we do not end up with questionable characters standing for the office of president. Its not only on the issue of illegibility for one to stand but many other reasons. Supposing a person adopted to stand has a criminal past or has a mental problem which lapses once in a while. It may be such a person is a moslem who wants to stand in a Christian nation. Some times we may have sponsored candidates put on the line just to create confusion. So its not just on the issue of illegibility. Again you are not right to say those speaking against bill 10 have not advanced varied reasons they have. That is why we are saying we can not allow to…
What does the past say about Article 52(4), has it caused confusion?
That is why we are saying we can not adopt a law under such contentious circumstances its better we retreat and reach consensus. Even in a war situation people retreat and reorganize.
@ Dokowe, you are spot on. Where in the past has it caused confusion, may be during the reign of PF government but Mr Mundubile should have cited a case and substantiate his point with that case. To the contrary @1 DM brings out solid facts which can not be refuted. On balance Bill 10 falls.
Even during a marriage ceremony there is that question kuti whoever thinks this marriage must not go ahead speak. A few times people have used that prerogative. Other times they have stayed silent (ku ona cabe ati marriage ni problem kansi). So it is the same with becoming usogoleli. Tikuti wamene azakamba monga Sangwa tizamumvela and we shall decide pamene apo whether we should act against the nominee or allow the election to go ahead. What is wrong with that weo Mundubile? ABemba nzelu zasililatu pamodzi na kolwe musanga. Mupaseni ndiyo uyo asinte kufunta!
Mr mundubile pf hs to work at reversing this perception u hv created which appears like pf is so scared of losing pwer. Pf nw is not cn like they are doing anything in national interest. Zats where the problem lies. Look at cec issue.look at bying of councilors,tribal favorig of 2 tribes only the whole country..etc. in whose interest is it. Is it national interest. No. Hw then do pipo trust u.Reverse this perception bcoz lungu can still win .
Scared of their own shadows
The removal of Article 52(4) from the current Constitution is unconstitutional becoz it violates the Rights of Zambians to Petition the Nomination of their Presidential Candidates. The integrity of a Presidential Candidate is very important and should be protectived by the Constitution.The Nomination of Candidates with a criminal and/or mental record should be avoided. On this basis Article 52(4) should be retained to protect the integrity of the office of the President. Period.
Typical of Bad Carpenter’s! Always blaming their own tools! Mundubuli and PF “bullies” have not made a good case as to what it is that necessities such urgent changes to our Constitution signed with eyes closed in 2016! They argue as if Bill 10 will give Zambians a perfect Constitution. There is no such thing as a “Perfect Constitution!” What makes the Constitution work is respect for it by observing the Rule of Law! It’s one thing to know the Letter of the Law like the Pharisees of old but you need to have the wisdom to understand the”Spirit of the Law!” In a Democracy, Citizens (Not leaders) own the Constitution! Leaders need to embrace “Moral Integrity” and Respect the Constitution and also to understand that Leaders are not above the Law!
My grade 1 end of term 2, exam went as follows..who is the minister of education? Ans Godfrey Miranda: who is the speaker of the national assembly: ans amusa mwanamwabwa..what is the maximum term of a president in Zambia?.ans two terms of 5 years each…now I am wondering these chaps in of who went to community schools…were are u getting all this staff of 2026??..the answer was 10 yes..not 10.5 or 11.8..or he was just finishing…no no no…guys it’s not too late to rewrite grade social studies since I presume mwalipona
PF fooolishness has reached alarming levels. Edgar isn’t eligible and the best time to challenge him is when he files his nomination. So Mundubile spare us this non sense. No one has ever stopped the collective will of Zambians, we’ll deal with you
The arguments by Mandubile are embarrassing. PF is admitting that ECL is ineligible to stand as Presidential Candidate for the third time. PF is so desperate and is giving the impression that Bill 10 is all about serving PF interests instead of National Interests. With this glaring admission by Mandubile all Progressive and Patriotic MPs should vote against Bill 10. Time to tell.
This is very true. Law should not disadvantage nor advantage anyone at the expense of others. That is what this retrogressive article will do if not amended or gotten rid off. Remember these are laws that will outlive us so we need to take a very objective view of them and the impact they may have. Kz
Since according to you the issue of “eligibility” was conclusively dealt with, kindly leave this article 52(4) alone. Courts will throw out “frivolous petitions” with costs anyway. Don’t stress since you are on “firm ground” legally. Time will tell. Hehehe….
Pf having a president who has studied law now thinks it knows law better than all the administrations that didn’t see anything wrong with article 52. Okay. Then let’s not debate bill 10 let’s try to debate it next year after elections, can u do that no. U nid to do this now or else it will be considered against the Constitution for him to stand third term
The PF fear that if article 52 is not repealed then they won’t have a candidate since they only have had one Edgar lungu. Selling another person or candidate to the people will be hard since they have been putting all their eggs in one basket which Edgar lungu. this scenario puts PF at a great disadvantage going to the polls. Now for PF with their brutal leading of the people whoever of the opposition wins the elections will give them great trouble.
For the PF bill 10 is all about ensuring the only person they can campaign for to stand without being opposed. They have ensured he is not challenged at party level and will try to do it at national level too. It is not about women, youths and the disabled, it’s about them not having an alternative person apart from Edgar lungu. Honestly can anyone on this platform tell me where in the current constitution is a clause that marginalizes or disadvantages the youths, women or disabled persons? The current constitution worked fine for the PF in 2016 so what is different in it now, what has changed? The constitution is not meant for an individual but the whole country, let’s have clauses that benefit the whole country and not a few people.
NO BILL 10 again we don’t want bill 10 imwee ba pf why so much interest over bill ten, tell us about the gassers and 49 houses. Payment of Retirees at PSPF and others. 1 year bill 10 no stop it now.
We are tired of debating this Dead Bill 10. PF should do the Nation a favour by forcing the Speaker of Parliament to retable the Bill in Parliament. The matter will be settled in Parliament thru a 2/3 Majority vote or the Court will Rule whether or not the Standing Committee has the mandate to resurrect a dead Bill for a vote in Parliament. Chapwa.
If you want transparent debates, why did you shutdown Prime TV?
PF got loans from Kumudzi kwao, shared, and their candidate is the Manchurian candidate, and passing Bill 10 will ensure that their candidate remains in office for ever. Fu Manchu is fast at defending the people from Kumudzi Kwao, because they sponsored his candidature and he has been blinded by love for their easy money. All the top PF members know this and they have formed a brotherhood in crimes against Zambia and its people by trashing our constitution. Imagine how empty they are: They can spend USD42m on fire tenders, but they cannot find real funds to pump into ZCCM -IH to agressively invest into Gold so that our North Western Province becomes the Life blood of Zambia and to be known as the Goldbelt Province! And not mentioning the huge career developments in the areas of mining and…
As they say if it ain’t broken why fix it? Article 52(4) was always been in our Constitution so why remove this clause now? By removing this clause PF are tacitly admitting that ECL has been elected and sworn in twice and is therefore disqualified to stand for a Third Term. Why is PF violating the Rights of Zambians to vet their Presidential Candidates? The removal of this Clause only serves the interests of PF and not National Interests. The removal is illegal and unconstitutional. Period.
i beg to differ these bafoons are just full of confusion.i foresee zambia being a baby for china and they can pass the laws which they passed in hong kong cz of these bafoons pf.we don’t want to give pf another term cz they will destroy zambia at the percy we are moving.