Church vows to continue denouncing homosexuality

By GRACE CHAILE

THE Church has maintained its position that homosexuality and any acts considered contrary to the order of nature are not only abominations but also morally wrong and should be opposed in defence of national values.
This came after the Constitutional Court dismissed a petition challenging sections of the Penal Code that criminalise same-sex relations.
Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) Executive Director, Bishop Andrew Mwenda, has welcomed the judgement and described it as a timely reminder for Christians to stand firm in defending morality and vices that offend the Christian values.
“Yes, we have to defend and protect our country, particularly against wrong morals like this, which will end up one day being legal. No, no, no. You can’t put it into the Constitution and say that they have the rights,” he said.
He added: “we need to find out if this moral is right or not. Our Bible says that it’s wrong, so we stand with the Bible.”
The Constitutional Court bench comprising Judges Arnold Shilimi, Martin Musaluke, Mathew Chisunka, Judy Mulongoti, Mudford Mwandenga, Maria Kawimbe, and Kenneth Mulife, dismissed the petition on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction.
The petitioners had sought several declarations, including that the expression “order of nature” in Section 155(a) of the Penal Code was vague and ambiguous and that subsections (a) and (c) violated Articles 8(d), 17, 18, 19, and 23 of the Constitution.
Specifically, they argued that Section 155(c) was discriminatory based on sex and promoted legal inequality. They claimed that criminalising consensual same-sex activity among adults infringed on rights to privacy, dignity and freedom of conscience.
The petitioners also contended that the Penal Code’s application created unequal treatment between same-sex and opposite-sex couples, whether married or not.
They questioned whether it was constitutionally reasonable in a democracy for the State to regulate how consenting adults engage in sexual intercourse in private, considering their fundamental rights.
In its defence, the State maintained that the only lawful sexual act under Zambian law is penile-vaginal intercourse between a man and a woman. It argued that any form of sexual activity outside that scope whether same-sex or otherwise remains a criminal offence under the law.
However, the court found that the petition failed to meet the legal threshold for a hearing before the Constitutional Court.
The judges observed that while the petition raised constitutional issues, it did not cite how any specific individual’s rights had been violated. Therefore, it fell within the jurisdiction of the High Court and not the Constitutional Court.
“A mere reference to Article 8 of the Constitution does not invoke this Court’s jurisdiction, as national values and principles are not justiciable in themselves,” the Court ruled. The judges added that questions raised by the petitioners regarding interpretation were misplaced, as only specific allegations of constitutional violations can be entertained in such a petition.
After a detailed analysis of the parties’ arguments, the Court ruled that the matter lacked merit and dismissed it in its entirety.
Meanwhile, ZCLU said it respected the ruling but would pursue the matter further. “We are seriously considering going to the High Court, because the Constitutional Court has even acknowledged that the issues that have been raised in this matter are very, very significant,” said its executive director, Mr Isaac Mwanza.