PF lawyers ‘ tricks to drag petition fails, given deadline to file documents

PF lawyers ‘ tricks to drag petition fails, given deadline to file documents

 

PF lawyers have been deliberately using delaying tactics in court so that the 14 days within which the constitutional court is supposed to hear the presidential petition lapses. But the court has just called their bluff.

Constitutional Court Update

26.08.2016

Court forces PF-lawyers to accept to be served the skeleton argument of an application for the custody and preservation of election materials and court orders that the court process continue at 11.30.

Initially in thier usual style of buying time PF-deliberately wanted to avoid being served so that the court could adjourn.

But thank God court orders them to accept to be served the skeleton argument from UPND lawyers.

UPND MEDIA TEAM

25.08.2016

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT PETITION UPDATE

The constitutional court has taken charge of the court process and has given Orders for Direction in which the respondents’ lawyers (Edgar Lungu, Inonge Wina and others’ lawyers) should file in the answer to the petition by month end August and HH /GMB lawyers have to file in by way of reply to the main petition by 1st of September.

In the interim, the Lungu/Wina’s lawyers have brought in an interlocutory application to strike out some of the clauses from our petition.

The Attorney General and ECZ lawyer have brought in a similar interlocutory application for the interim relief for the court to strike out certain provisions in the HH/GBM lawyers petition which are still pending to be heard before the court , the problem is that Lungu’s Lawyers do not serve the documents and when our lawyers go to court, Lungu’s lawyers say no, we have not been served by the HH/GBM’s lawyers, the idea and gimmick is for Lungu/Inonge Wina’s lawyers to make the process get into a constitutional lacuna so that the 14 days can elapse.

But thank God the constitutional court has given orders of direction, a period within which the respondent lawyers (Lungu’s Lawyers) should file in the answer to the petition of HH’s lawyers and HH’s lawyers will reply.

Contrary to what you are seeing on social media no application by the HH/GBM Lawyers has been thrown out.

The other information is that the Registrar of the High court went and filed an affidavit in support of the respondent (Attorney General), claiming that the court has got no space to keep the election materials but our learned lawyers argued that the Registrar has no loci standi (legal standing) and that that would put the reputation of the court at risk.

This follows the application made by the HH/GBM Lawyers for the custody and preservation of all election materials.

Meanwhile we urge our members to remain calm because we have a good case. Our lawyers are ready to proceed with the matter.

UPND MEDIA TEAM

Share this post