The Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) has clarified that the dismissal of three Constitutional Court judges was rooted in their lack of qualifications, not their interpretation of the Constitution.
Acting JCC Secretary Brian Gombwa made this submission in response to a petition challenging the Commission’s authority.
Gombwa refuted claims that Judges Annie Sitali, Mugeni Mulenga, and Palan Mulonda were removed due to their constitutional rulings, stating,”The evidence that was led before JCC disclosed that the said three judges were not qualified to hold the office of judge. Therefore, the reason for the removal of the judges was not as a result of the manner they interpreted the constitution,”
This is in a case filed by constitutional lawyer Tresford Chali before the Constitutional Court, questioning the qualifications of the current JCC members to recommend the removal of judges. Chali contends that most JCC members, apart from retired Justice Prisca Nyambe, lack the requisite experience in high judicial office, rendering their recommendations invalid.
He seeks a declaration that the commission, chaired by Vincent Malambo, lacked quorum to recommend the dismissal of the three judges.
In defence, Gombwa argued that the JCC acted within its constitutional mandate to investigate complaints brought before it, dismissing suggestions that the matter was improperly handled or previously resolved.
He also emphasised that commissioners Eva Jhala and Kephas Katongo Kampampa meet the qualifications for high judicial office, with 45 and 33 years of legal experience, respectively.
He noted that the judges enjoyed security of tenure, but this did not shield those found incompetent or guilty of gross misconduct.
He stressed that the JCC followed all constitutional procedures and the Judicial Code of Conduct in handling the matter.
