By 
The Attorney-General, Mulilo Kabesha,has backed the decision by President Hakainde Hichilema, not to relocate to State House, as there was no constitutional provision which mandated him to do so.
The State submitted to the Constitutional Court that accommodation of the past Heads of State at State House was only a matter of practice or custom and not by law.
It added that State House was in a dilapidated state and required renovations at a great cost.
In this matter, leader of the Patriots for Economic Progress (PEP), Sean Tembo, petitioned the Constitutional Court over President Hichilema’s refusal to relocate to State House since he was elected in August, 2021.
Tembo said the petition is with the realization that the Head of State was spending huge sums of money through his trips from Community House to State House on a daily basis and putting at risk the safety of many Zambians on the route he is using to access his house.
He said the same money which was being used on a daily basis and about K126 million per annum, could be channelled to other areas of need such as procurement of drugs in hospitals and books for readers in schools.
According to an affidavit in opposition to petitioner’s affidavit in support of petition, sworn by Ministry of Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development, Permanent Secretary, Albert Malama, renovations of State House will cost huge sums of money.
The State argued that renovations of State House was not something urgent especially that the country was faced with the challenge of servicing huge financial debts.
“We ask this court to take Judicial notice of the widely known fact that the ministry of finance has repeatedly stated that Zambia is currently servicing huge financial debts amounting to US$30,075,120,811.00. We submit that the expense of renovating state house could be not therefore justified,” submitted the state.
It additionally highlighted the fact that the President’s decision was in line with the guiding principles of public finance set out by article 198(III) which requires a public finance system that ensures that expenditure promotes the equitable development of the country.
“We submit in response to these allegations that the petitioners arguments are misconceived as the president remaining at his own private residence instead of shifting into state house does not constitute an imprudent and irresponsible use of natural resources nor breach the guiding principles of public finance as set out by article 198 of the Constitution, but has been necessitated by the decision if the ministry of infrastructure not to immediately renovate State House which is in a dilapidated state,”
The State argued that the petition lacked merit on account that the petitioner had not sighted the particular article or law which mandates the president actually reside at State House.
The Constitutional Court has been urged to dismiss the petition with costs.
WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.
Comments