‘You are liable for reckless remarks made outside parliament’ — Constitutional court dismisses Zulu

The Constitutional Court of Zambia has dismissed a petition by former Lumezi Member of Parliament Munir Zulu, ruling that parliamentary immunity does not extend to statements made outside formal proceedings of the National Assembly of Zambia.

The five-member bench, led by Deputy President Arnold Shilimi, delivered a unanimous verdict, effectively closing Zulu’s high-profile constitutional challenge.

Zulu had taken legal action after his prosecution for criminal libel, citing the Attorney General of Zambia, the Director of Public Prosecutions, and Lusaka Chief Resident Magistrate Davies Chibwili as respondents.

He argued that his constitutional rights were violated, claiming the magistrate erred by refusing to refer his questions for constitutional interpretation under Article 128(2), and that the DPP had acted unlawfully by prosecuting him despite the protections he believed were afforded under Article 76.

Zulu further contended that the matter should have been addressed internally by the Speaker of the National Assembly.

However, the Attorney General countered that Zulu’s application did not raise a legitimate constitutional question requiring interpretation by the ConCourt.

According to court records, Zulu was facing three counts of criminal libel relating to statements he allegedly made about cabinet ministers Charles Milupi and Situmbeko Musokotwane, as well as then-RDA chairperson Mulchand Kuntwala—statements in which he accused them of receiving corrupt gratification.

His request to have constitutional issues referred to the Constitutional court was dismissed by the magistrate for being filed late and for lacking a bona fide constitutional basis.

The Constitutional court agreed, emphasizing that Article 128(2) referrals only apply where a genuine constitutional question is raised.

“Press briefings are not formal proceedings of the House and do not form part of its core functions,” the Court ruled, adding, “They are therefore not covered by Article 76(1) of the Constitution.”

The Court concluded that the criminal proceedings did not violate Zulu’s constitutional rights and dismissed his petition for lack of merit.

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.