Here is a complete draft of the essay structured using the IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) format

for each of the grounds raised in your assignment.

*Note: While this text is formatted for readability here using Markdown, you will need to copy and paste
this into Microsoft Word (or a similar word processor) to apply the mandatory 1.5 line spacing and 12-
point Times New Roman font required by your instructions.*

**ALBINO v MALONSON: APPELLATE ADVICE CONCERNING THE LEBOLESON CONSTITUENCY

**1.0 Introduction**

This advice assesses the prospects of success for Albino, a parliamentary candidate for the No
Accountability Party (NAP), in her intended appeal to the Constitutional Court of Zambia. Albino
challenges the High Court’s refusal to nullify the election of Malonson, an independent candidate under
the Manyozo Forwarding Party (MFP), who was declared the winner of the Leboleson constituency seat.
The retaining officer announced that Malonson received 3500 votes against Albino’s 3200 votes. During
the High Court petition, credible evidence was admitted proving voter disenfranchisement, an aggressive
defamatory smear campaign, the provision of free beer to voters, and a significant tabulation error by
the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ). Despite finding this evidence credible, the High Court judge
declined to void the election. This essay will analyze the four primary issues using the Electoral Process
Act No. 35 of 2016 and relevant constitutional principles to demonstrate that Albino has overwhelming
prospects of success on appeal.

**2.0 Issue 1: ECZ Tabulation Error**

**Issue:** Did the ECZ's erroneous crediting of 300 spoilt ballots to Malonson constitute non-
compliance with electoral law sufficient to render the election result void?

**Rule:** Under Section 97(2)(b) of the Electoral Process Act No. 35 of 2016, an election shall be
declared void if non-compliance with the provisions of the Act affected the result of the election. Spoilt
ballots are statutorily invalid and must be excluded from the valid vote count. The established test for
non-compliance, as articulated in landmark Zambian electoral jurisprudence such as *Lewanika and
Others v Chiluba*, is whether the irregularity mathematically altered the outcome or prevented a
majority of voters from electing the candidate they preferred.

**Analysis:** The retaining officer declared Malonson the winner with 3500 votes, defeating Albino who
garnered 3200 votes. This represents a margin of exactly 300 votes. The ECZ officials confirmed that 300
extra votes credited to Malonson were, in fact, spoilt ballots. Deducting these 300 invalid votes from
Malonson's tally leaves him with exactly 3200 valid votes. Consequently, Malonson and Albino are
mathematically tied at 3200 votes each. Because the inclusion of spoilt ballots created a false majority
for Malonson, this administrative error directly and unquestionably affected the result of the election.

**Conclusion:** The High Court erred in law by failing to recognize the mathematical reality of the ECZ's
error. The Constitutional Court is highly likely to void the election on this ground alone, as Malonson did
not legitimately secure a majority of valid votes.

**3.0 Issue 2: Electoral Corruption (Treating)**

**Rule:** Section 82 of the Electoral Process Act No. 35 of 2016 expressly prohibits the corrupt practice
of "treating." A person commits treating if they corruptly provide or pay for any food, drink, or
entertainment for the purpose of influencing a voter. Furthermore, Section 97(1)(a) provides that a
parliamentary election shall be void if the court is satisfied that any corrupt practice was committed in
connection with the election by, or with the knowledge and consent of, the winning candidate. Standard
of proof for corrupt practices requires a high degree of preponderance of probability.

**Analysis:** The High Court admitted credible evidence that Malonson sponsored a nightclub in every
ward within the constituency, providing free beer to all patrons during the critical final week of
campaigns. The distribution of free alcohol to the electorate on the eve of an election falls squarely
within the statutory definition of treating. Because Malonson personally sponsored this initiative, the
corrupt practice was committed with his direct knowledge and consent.

**Conclusion:** This action constitutes a corrupt practice by the candidate. Under Section 97(1)(a), the
court has a mandatory duty to nullify an election where a corrupt practice by the winning candidate is
proven. Therefore, Albino will likely succeed on this ground.

**4.0 Issue 3: Illegal Practice (Smear Campaign)**

**Issue:** Does the false assertion by Malonson that Albino bed-wets constitute an illegal practice that
voids the election?

**Rule:** Section 90 of the Electoral Process Act prohibits the publication of false statements of fact
concerning the personal character or conduct of a candidate, calculated to affect the result of the
election. Such conduct constitutes an illegal practice. According to Section 97(1)(b), an election is void if
an illegal practice is committed with the knowledge and consent of the candidate.

**Analysis:** During the campaign, Malonson ran an aggressive smear campaign asserting that Albino
bed-wets and would spoil the beddings at Parliament Motel. This statement is a direct, highly
defamatory attack on Albino's personal character, completely unrelated to public policy or political
capability. It was clearly calculated to subject her to public ridicule and diminish her electoral prospects.
Since the facts stipulate that "Malonson ran" this campaign, the illegal practice is directly attributable to
him.

**Conclusion:** The publication of this false and defamatory statement regarding Albino's character is
an illegal practice. As it was conducted directly by Malonson, it provides a strong, independent statutory
ground for the Constitutional Court to nullify the election.

**5.0 Issue 4: Disenfranchisement of Voters**

**Issue:** Does the turning away of 200 duly registered voters due to missing names on the voter
registers at their polling stations invalidate the election?

**Rule:** Article 45 of the Constitution of Zambia guarantees the right of registered citizens to vote in
free and fair elections. The ECZ is mandated to maintain an accurate voters' roll. However, for
administrative disenfranchisement to void an election under Section 97(2)(b) of the Electoral Process
Act, the petitioner must demonstrate that the irregularity affected the overall result.

**Analysis:** The High Court admitted evidence that 200 voters were wrongfully sent away on election
day because their names were not found in the registers at their respective polling stations, despite
being within the same constituency. Standing alone, 200 votes might not overturn a large majority.
However, as established in the first issue, the true valid vote tally between Malonson and Albino is
perfectly tied at 3200 votes. In the context of a tied election, the disenfranchisement of 200 voters is
catastrophic to the democratic process, as those 200 voters had the absolute mathematical power to
determine the definitive winner of the constituency.

**Conclusion:** The disenfranchisement of these voters is a severe constitutional irregularity. Combined

**6.0 Overall Conclusion**

Albino has excellent prospects of success on appeal to the Constitutional Court. The High Court judge
committed a grave error by declining to nullify the election after admitting credible evidence of such
severe infractions. Malonson's election is fundamentally flawed on multiple independent grounds: the
mathematical tabulation error by the ECZ which destroyed his majority, the statutory corrupt practice of
treating voters with free beer, and the illegal practice of character defamation. Any one of these grounds,
particularly when combined with the disenfranchisement of 200 voters in what is mathematically a tied
election, is more than sufficient under the Electoral Process Act to void the parliamentary results for
Leboleson constituency.

I can certainly help you craft a strong introduction for your Constitutional Law assignment.

A standard legal essay introduction should do four things:

1. **Summarize the core conflict:** Briefly state who the parties are and what the dispute is about.

2. **Identify the jurisdiction/forum:** Mention where the case is headed (the Constitutional Court).

3. **Outline the legal issues:** Highlight the specific legal wrongs (irregularities, corruption, etc.) raised
by the facts.

4. **State your thesis:** Give a clear roadmap of what your essay will conclude regarding Albino's
prospects of success.

Here is a draft of an introduction you can use and adapt for your assignment:

### Draft Introduction

The legal scenario at hand revolves around an electoral dispute following the parliamentary elections in
Leboleson constituency, where Malonson was declared the winner over his major rival, Albino. Despite
admitting credible evidence of severe electoral malpractices and administrative errors, the High Court
declined to nullify Malonson's election. Albino is now seeking to appeal this decision to the
Constitutional Court. To advise Albino on her prospects of success, this paper will analyze the admitted
evidence against the provisions of the Constitution of Zambia and the Electoral Process Act. Specifically,
this discussion will evaluate four primary legal issues: the disenfranchisement of 200 duly registered
voters due to missing names on the voter register; the illegal practice of publishing false and defamatory
statements regarding Albino's character during the campaign; the act of electoral corruption or
"treating" through the sponsorship of free beer in the final week of campaigns; and the Electoral
Commission of Zambia's (ECZ) critical tabulation error that erroneously credited 300 spoilt ballots to
Malonson. By examining these factors in light of relevant statutory authorities and judicial precedents,
this paper will argue that Albino has strong prospects of success on appeal, as these irregularities
arguably affected the outcome of the election and compromised the principles of a free and fair
electoral process.

### Tips for moving forward with your essay:

* **The Math:** In your body paragraphs, make sure to do the math on the 300 extra votes. Malonson
won by 300 votes (3500 to 3200). If the 300 extra votes credited to Malonson are removed, the
candidates are tied, heavily impacting the "majority principle" test in electoral law.

* **Relevant Authorities:** Be sure to look up the **Electoral Process Act No. 35 of 2016** (specifically
sections dealing with treating, false statements, and grounds for voiding an election) and relevant
Zambian case law on election petitions (e.g., the *Munali* or *Lusaka Central* petition cases, or older
landmark cases like *Lewanika and Others v Chiluba* depending on what your syllabus covers).

* **Formatting Reminder:** Don't forget to follow your specific instructions: ensure it is typed with 1.5
spacing, uses 12-point Times New Roman font, does not exceed 6 pages, and uses the OSCOLA
referencing style for your footnotes.

Do you need help structuring the body paragraphs for each of the four legal issues identified in the facts?