|
|
|
Gwanda, Fachi in war of words
By
Kondwani Munthali |
|
|
Attorney General Peter Fachi yesterday stirred a hornets’ nest in Parliament when he told the House that the court order reinstating MCP president Gwanda Chakuamba as leader of opposition could not be enforced as the courts had no jurisdiction over Parliament’s internal affairs.
The matter, which had been earlier debated upon, was brought into the light by MCP Treasurer General Hetherwick Ntaba, who stood on a point of order, gratitude and privilege.
Ntaba, who started by praising Speaker Sam Mpasu as “an honest and strong-willed gentleman” said he was unhappy that members were deliberately withholding information from the Speaker, thereby leading him to making wrong decisions.
“I am saying this because the integrity of the chair is put in question because of withholding such information. This is the same with the court order that was served on the Attorney General at 3:18 PM of Monday concerning the leader of opposition,” said Ntaba.
But Mpasu shot back. He told Ntaba that according to the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act, the House could not be served with a court order or summons. The Speaker proceeded to ask Fachi if he “had flouted the laws”.
Mpasu, who had earlier refused to recognise Chakuamba as leader of opposition, proceeded to ask Fachi if he “had flouted the laws”, or if he should have accepted the order.
“Mr. Speaker, I have the document which is being referred to as a court injunction. This so-called court order has defects and cannot be enforced, neither by you nor the House, such that it does not affect us at all,” said Fachi to cheers from the Tembo faction.
Fachi said the matter that had been ruled upon was between Chakuamba and Tembo, and the injunction restrained Tembo, his servants and agents from recognising and acting as the leader of opposition.
“Mr. Speaker, you are not Tembo’s servant nor his agent, the same with the honourable members. Therefore, this injunction is of no legal consequence to us or you, the Speaker,” said Fachi.
Ntaba, Chakuamba and their Aford sympathisers kept shaking their heads in disbelief.
Fachi said apart from not being party to the court proceedings, the court had no powers to interfere with the affairs of the National Assembly as the question of the leader of opposition was not a constitutional office.
“The Supreme Court and not the High Court ruled that courts could only come in when this House tries to extend its powers beyond the provided ones. The problem is that Chakuamba enjoys and aspires for positions, such as these, that are not legally constituted,” said Fachi.
“I therefore submit that this court order does not affect us, as the courts have no powers over this House. It should not poke its nose [into it],” concluded Fachi.
But Chakuamba could not take Fachi’s remarks sitting.
“I did not go to court because I aspire for positions, but because he is not an interpreter, nor this House is, of any law made, but the courts.”
Chakuamba said he respected all court setups and the rule of law, and that was why he sought interpretation of Parliament’s Standing Orders, which the High Court judge had ordered upon.
“If he says the judge is rubbish, that is well and good with me. The courts have their own mechanism. I [neither] interpret nor enforce it, but he should refrain from accusing me of being power-hungry.
“He has tried to become a parliamentarian several times but has failed. He is power-hungry. He is in this House by the mercy of the State President,” said Chakuamba.
Ntaba stood on a point of order, and told Fachi to make his arguments in court, as on several occasions he had misled the House and the Head of State.
Mzuzu MP Rodger Nkhwazi stood on point of order and said:
“We have wasted a lot of time debating the MCP problem and I propose that until the leadership wrangle is solved in the MCP, the leader of opposition should be given to Aford.” The whole House broke into laughter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
