Chitala v Attorney General
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 08. 2023
- Chitala v Attorney General (S.C.Z. Judgment No. 14 of 1995) [1995] ZMSC 32 (31 October 1995)
#chitalacase #Agvschitala
Head note
The President, Acting under s.2 of the Inquiries Act, Cap 1981, appointed a Commission to be chaired by the learned John Mwanakatwe, SC. To this end, the Commission travelled around the country collecting views from the Zambian people. At the end of the exercise, the Commission formulated a draft constitution most of whose provisions the government refused to accept. Instead the government drafted a constitution with controversial clauses in it and sent it to Parliament for enactment and subsequent adoption. The Commission had recommended that the Constitution be adopted by a constituent assembly and national referendum. The appellant, in an effort to challenge the government's decision, sought leave to apply for judicial review of the goverment's decision to have the Constitution adopted by parliament. The High Court denied leave and the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.
Held:
(i) Although the application was neither frivolous nor vexatious, it was legally an untenable application on the face of it such that it was not wrong for the judge below to refuse leave summarily
(ii) The applicant had sufficient interest in the matter
Cases referred to:
1) Ridge v Baldwin (1964)
2) Mwamba and Another v Attorney General (1993) 3 L.R.C. 166; S.C.Z. Judgement No. 10 of 1993
3) Council of Civil Service Unions and Others v Minister for the Civil Service
4) Patriotic Front ZANU v Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs (1986) L.R.C. (const.)672
5) Leonard Kafunda v The Attorney General and Another, Appeal No. 20 of 1992
6) Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1968) A.C. 997
7) Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation (1948)IK.B. 223
8) Reg. v Home Secretary, Ex.p Brind 21WLr of 22nd February 1991, 588 at 601
For the Appellant: R. Simeza and J. Sangwa, of Simeza Sangwa and Associates
For the Respondent: S. L. Chisulo, Solicitor General, and A. G. Kinariwala, Principal.
Don't forget to subscribe if you find it helpful
follow me on tiktok tiktok.com/@emmanuelmwangaila1
Facebook; Emmanuel Mwangaila
Instagram; @emmanuelmwangaila1
Follow my UNZA radio series too; • Artificial Intelligenc...
This is good, but the back ground song is kinda loud than you
Thank you for your review and we tried our best to work on the music ... Check out episode 2 of the case of Fairview Hotel V Ebrahim Motala here; czcams.com/video/7V5_P239b6I/video.htmlsi=lkaPI8zSf9_HunM0
The background noise was very unnecessary
Noted! the next time we record it won't be there
🔥🔥
Thanks
Thank you 😊
The background noise is too loud
We took note of that the next episodes will be good
This is wonderful
Thanks
This is indeed a wonderful review... please continue @emmanuelmwangaila1 and Chimwemwe
Thank you very much 😊🙏🏿
Thank you