By 
The Constitutional Court has dismissed an attempt to cite Speaker of the National Assembly Nelly Mutti, her deputies, and all Members of Parliament for contempt, ruling that the application was misconceived since the main matter involving Bill 7 was already concluded.
Delivering a succinct but firm ruling, Judge Judy Mulongoti said the petitioners had invoked a procedure that only applied to matters still under judicial consideration, yet judgment on Bill 7 had been delivered on June 27, 2025.
“I have considered the summons to commence contempt and committal proceedings made pursuant to Order 9 Rule 20(1),” she said.
“Interlocutory applications are typically made during or pending the hearing of the main matter, which in this case has already been disposed of. Therefore, the application is misconceived and cannot be entertained. I accordingly dismiss it,”’ Mulongoti said.
The dismissed application had accused the Speaker, senior parliamentary officials, Justice Minister Princess Kasune, and all 165 MPs of defying the Court’s June ruling which declared Bill 7 unconstitutional and void for lack of public consultation.
According to an affidavit filed by petitioner Celestine Mukandila, the alleged contempt stemmed from a video circulated online in which First Deputy Speaker Malungo Chisangano announced that she had received communication from the Minister of Justice indicating that Bill 7—earlier deferred—would return to Parliament and that committee sittings would commence immediately.
Read More: Constitutional Court rejects bid by Oasis Forum to halt constitution amendment process
Mukandila argued that the Court’s ruling rendered Bill 7 “null and void ab initio” and that Parliament’s decision to continue processing it was “highly contemptuous and disrespectful” to the authority of the Court.
He insisted that any MP or official who took part in what he described as an illegal constitutional amendment process was in open defiance of the June judgment.
PF Matero MP Miles Sampa, one of those cited, told the Court he had immediately withdrawn from any business relating to Bill 7 once he became aware of the contempt summons.
“I was served in person and electronically,” he said. “When it came to my attention, I stopped attending any session on Bill 7 until this matter is disposed of.”
However, when the bench pressed him on why he claimed to have stopped participating “early last week,” despite the application only being filed on Friday, Sampa maintained that he had nonetheless refrained from further engagement in the matter.
WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.
Comments