Sangwa Challenged On Third Term Petition

Constitutional lawyer John Sangwa has been challenged to bring forward a petition he has claimed to have on his laptop that challenges President Lungu’s eligibility in the 2021 elections.

The challenge comes from the PF Minister for Eastern Province Hon Makebi Zulu who has been quoted as stating, “He says he has this petition on his laptop, let him bring it, will respond to it and we will make sure he pays costs personally.”

Sangwa had previously argued that because President Lungu has been elected twice he cannot seek a third term.

“When you read the language of the Constitution, it is very clear. The bottom line is President Lungu does not qualify to stand in 2021, the issue is as simple as that. The Constitution does not talk about the number of times you serve, it is the number of times you get elected… There is no provision for a third term in our Constitution!” he has stated.

Addressing the matter Mr Zulu described the petition as a non-issue that has already been resolved. A legal challenge once nominations have been submitted could shorten the campaigning period.

John Sangwa’s right to appear in court was restored by the Judiciary earlier this month, after it indicated that it will no longer be pursuing charges of contempt against him.

Sangwa’s suspension, announced earlier this year, followed his comments concerning the composition of the Constitutional Court, as well as the eligibility of President Lungu to run for a third term in office in 2021.

Sangwa, who previously wrote to President Lungu setting out his concerns regarding the Court prior to their appointment, alleged that the appointees were not suitably qualified for the posts.

“If you have never done Constitutional law in your life then you are not qualified, so when you take up a position in the Constitutional Court, that’s a bribe! You must have served for 15 years at the bar to be able to qualify. You must have been a legal practitioner and you must have done some work in the area of Constitutional law,” he was quoted as stating. 

Following his suspension, a number of civil society groups came to his defence. These included the Civil Society Constitution Agenda (CiSCA) and Amnesty International.

The Judiciary’s revised position was set out in a letter to the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) and follows a recent statement by Sangwa in which he recognised the appointment of the Constitutional Court judges and respected their authority.

“When the names of the six nominees to the Constitutional Court were announced, in line with my oath of office as a lawyer and right and duty as a citizen to protect and defend the Constitution, I evaluated the qualifications of each nominee based on the documents submitted in support of their respective nominations against the relevant provisions of the Constitution. It was my opinion that none of the nominees qualified for appointment to the office of Judge of the Constitutional Court,” Sangwa stated.

“What is contained in the brief is and remains my opinion, given as part of the vetting process of the Judges of the Constitutional Court. My opinion was not accepted,” he continued.

However, despite his opinion on the matter being rejected by the authorities Sangwa confirmed that he ultimately accepts their appointment explaining, “Defending and protecting the Constitution is not just about ensuring that it is not violated. It is also about respecting the processes established by the Constitution and accepting the outcome. I have accepted the appointment of the Judges of the Constitutional Court and recognise and respect their authority.”