|
|
|
|
| National |
| Nangwale is still IG: Government to table issue again |
|
by
Joseph Langa, 01 April 2005
-
15:33:08
|
The High Court in Lilongwe on Thursday evening granted an injunction to Mary Nangwale to continue working as Inspector General of Police pending a judicial review, her lawyer Rex Mapila confirmed.
Meanwhile, Speaker of the National Assembly Rodwell Munyenyembe has said that the issue of Nangwale’s confirmation may be tabled again in the House for MPs to rescind their decision.
Mapila said he was hired by Nangwale to seek the injunction and some women activists also played a role in the matter.
“The injunction has been granted. At the moment the status quo is as it was before the decision was made by Parliament,” Mapila said. “But I am yet to serve [the injunction] on the Attorney General”.
Mapila said her client had to go to court because some procedures were not followed when Parliament made a decision not to confirm her as Inspector General.
“The requirement is that if a Member of Parliament has an interest in the matter he/she was supposed to clear that interest and then Parliament will decide whether to allow him/her to debate or to vote. That did not happen,” he said.
“From that debate it was clear that some of the members had an interest in the matter”.
Mapila said Nangwale was removed by Parliament amid controversy on Wednesday when her confirmation went into a roll call vote where 88 MPs voted against her while 83 were in her favour.
Malawi Law Society Secretary Linda Ziyendammanja said Nangwale has taken a proper course of action, saying when one is dissatisfied with the decision of a public body one can ask the court to review the decision by way of judicial review and ask for an injunction within the same judicial review.
Ziyendammanja said the court has the power to review the decision although there is separation of powers between the legislature and the judiciary.
She said although the legislature is empowered by the Constitution to do what they did, the same Constitution gives everyone who is aggrieved the right to appeal through the court.
But Ziyendammanja reserved her comment when asked whether she thinks the Attorney General will be professional to defend Parliament’s decision in court when it is clear that government wanted Nangwale to be Inspector General.
Munyenyembe in an interview said Parliament’s standing orders allow the Business Committee, which sets the agenda for the House, to bring back an issue for further debate.
“Yes, standing orders provide for that but there are procedures to be followed,” said Munyenyembe when asked to confirm reports that the government was trying to drum up support from the MPs to rescind their decision.
The committee, he added, was expected to meet to see if the matter could be tabled again.
But the Speaker refused to comment further because “I don’t want to prejudge anything.”
When contacted for comment on Thursday, Nangwale simply said: “My eyes are focused on my God.”
This is the first time that Parliament has refused to confirm an IG.
Efforts to get government’s comment on what makes it confident it would succeed this time proved fruitless as spokesperson Ken Lipenga’s phone went unanswered.
Leader of UDF in Parliament Leonard Mangulama said he could not comment on what party’s stand would be should the matter be reintroduced, saying “this matter is now in the hands of the Speaker’s office not the parties, so it would be difficult to comment on something out of our hands”.
Women’s caucus chair Lilian Patel, who voted against Nangwale, could also not be drawn to comment on the issue, saying she was in a meeting.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
