![[...]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/9cad33b85e99b552b548e6ddd6afed37ad443a048e65e6ca5580ba0bef491764?s=120&d=mm&r=g){kind=avatar}
By GRACE CHAILE
ATTORNEY General, Mulilo Kabesha has warned that Judges who are incompetent or have grossly misconducted themselves shall have no business being in the Judiciary.
This comes after three Constitutional Court Judges, Annie Sitali, Mungeni Mulenga, and Palan Mulonda, were fired with constitutional lawyer, Tresford Chali filing a petition challenging the qualifications of the Judicial Complaints Commission (JCC) members who recommended their dismissal. Mr Chali claimed that the JCC members lacked the required high judicial office experience, rendering them unqualified to sit on the commission.
He is seeking declarations that the JCC members were not qualified and that Parliament should enact legislation specifying qualifications for JCC members.
But Mr Kabesha, in his affidavit in opposition to the petition filed in the Constitutional Court, argued that the security of tenure for Judges did not extend to those who were found to be incompetent or have grossly misconducted themselves.
“That only judges who are above board are supposed to be allowed to proceed on retirement or indeed resign. Erring judges have no place in the judiciary,” Mr Kabesha contended. He noted that commissioner Eva Jhala and Commissioner Kephas Katongo were qualified to hold high judicial office, having been legal practitioners for 45 and 33 years, respectively.
Mr Kabesha alleged that according to evidence adduced before JCC, the three former Judges were not qualified to hold office and had engaged in illegal activities, including convening a meeting without the knowledge and approval of the Judge President to craft a ruling that overturned a previous decision to hear the 2016 election petition.
The Attorney General asked the Court not to allow the petition as it lacked merit and that the JCC members are qualified to hold judicial office.
Mr Kabesha also argued that the petitioner was aware of the separation of powers and the enactment of laws was an executive function, and thus, would be put to strict proof.
