Fri, 05 May 2017 10:19:16 +0000
By CHARLES MUSONDA
UPND president Hakainde Hichilema and his five co-accused have been committed to the High Court for trial in the case they are charged with treason.
The committal has automatically dealt a blow to the preliminary inquiry which the court granted the defence last week.
Mr. Hichilema’s lawyers have strongly opposed the committal and asked the Lusaka Magistrates’ Court to refer constitutional issues the matter has raised to the High Court for determination.
Earlier yesterday, Principal Resident Magistrate David Simusamba ordered the police to release a mobile phone, two motor vehicles and keys for another vehicle seized from two of Hichilema’s co-accused without a seizure notice.
But before the preliminary inquiry could start, public prosecutor Noah Mwanza, informed the court that the Director of Public Prosecutions had committed the accused persons to the High Court for the treason trial.
Opposing the committal, defence lawyer Keith Mweemba argued that DPP Lilian Shawa-Siyunyi had not personally issued the certificate of committal as the document showed that it was issued by Deputy Chief State Advocate Marriam Mutebi Bah-Matandala.
“There was no application that was given before you to amend the charge and this court is being invited to commit people in the vacuum…the State keeps shifting positions like a river on soft sand. If this doesn’t signify bad faith, then what is it?” Mr. Mweemba said.
He said the accused persons were incarcerated on an unbailable offence based on the bad charge just because the State thought the due process would follow. Mr. Mweemba said that bordered on the constitutioHe said even under the figment of imagination, there was no treason to talk about, adding that the DPP’s powers to commit were not unchallengeable; and urged the court to ignore the committal.
“Is it unlawful, unreasonable, democratically unjustifiable and unpermissible for the State to charge the accused with treason when even on the face of it the offence of treason does not arise in line with provisions of section 137 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) as read with Article 18 (2) on fair trial?
“We raise these questions because the State want to perpetuate incarceration of the accused, hence the move to avoid the preliminary inquiry by issuing the certificate of committal.
The matter continues this morning for the prosecution to respond to the defence lawyers’ application to refer constitutional issues to the High Court.
