09/05/2026
High Court refuses to stop Parliament from processing 77 Bills
PARLIAMENT’S fast-track processing of 77 Bills before dissolution has survived an attempted halt after the Lusaka High Court refused to stop the legislative marathon.
LCK Freedom Foundation and Chapter One Foundation had rushed to the High Court seeking permission to challenge Parliament’s decision to suspend Standing Orders and quickly process the Bills before Parliament dissolves next week.
The two organisations argued that the move denied citizens enough time to participate in the legislative process as required by Article 89 of the Constitution.
They further wanted the court to stop the Attorney General, National Assembly and Clerk of the National Assembly from tabling, debating or forwarding the Bills to President Hakainde Hichilema for assent pending determination of the matter.
But High Court judge Lameck Mwale yesterday threw out the application, ruling that the matter falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court and not the High Court.
Justice Mwale explained that the case heavily relied on interpreting constitutional provisions relating to public participation in law making, something only the Constitutional Court is allowed to handle.
“Quite clearly, the issues that the Applicants seek to pursue in the present case are constitutional in nature and can only be given proper constitutional interpretation and effect by the Constitutional Court,” ruled Justice Mwale.
The judge noted that while Parliament has powers under Article 77 of the Constitution to regulate its own procedures and Standing Orders, the applicants were essentially asking the High Court to interpret whether Parliament’s actions violated Article 89.
According to the court, such questions can only be determined by the Constitutional Court under Article 128 of the Constitution.
Justice Mwale further stated that the leave stage in judicial review proceedings is meant to filter out weak cases before a full hearing.
He said after carefully examining the application, he was not satisfied that the matter was fit for further investigation before the High Court because of lack of jurisdiction.
“In the premises, I come to the inescapable conclusion that the application for leave should be denied for want of jurisdiction. Accordingly, the application is hereby dismissed,” stated the judge.
