Legal Process Lecture Notes
Legal Process Lecture Notes
UNIT 1
INTRODUCTION TO LAW
1. What is ‘law’?
NOTE: The difficulty associated with defining the concept of law has
given rise to various theories or schools of thought on the
‘nature’ of law. These include the Natural Law School of thought
and the Positivist School of thought.
2. CLASSIFICATIONS OF LAW
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
QUESTION: Can a ‘wrong’ be both civil and criminal? If so, are there any
examples?
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
NOTE: that Common law is usually distinguished from ‘statute law’ (i.e. the law
laid down in Acts of Parliament) and ‘civil law’ (i.e. the law of Rome).
NOTE: Every student should ensure that he/she understands the origins of both
common law and the doctrine of equity.
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Substantive law sets out the actual rights and duties of legal
subjects while procedural law spells out the procedure for
enforcing the substantive rights and duties. In other words,
substantive law sets out the actual rules to govern human
conduct while procedural law deals with the legal remedies by
means of which the rules are ere enforced. Procedural law is
also sometimes called ‘adjectival law’.
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• Suffice to state that the concept of justice denotes ‘fairness’ and law is
intended to bring about a ‘just’ or ‘fair’ society. Therein lies the
relationship between law and justice. But it is not as simple as that!
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
UNIT 2
2.1 Introduction
• It has been defined as “an operating set of legal institutions, procedures, and
rules. In this sense there is one federal legal system and fifty state legal
systems in the United States, separate legal systems in each of the other
nations, and still other distinct legal system in such organizations as the
European Economic Community and the United Nations.”
• It has also been described as referring to “the nature and content of the law
generally, and the structures and methods whereby it is legislated upon,
adjudicated upon and administered, within a given jurisdiction”.
Does it follow that there exists as many ‘legal systems’ as the known countries of
the world?
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
system; and the Roman-Dutch law system. Others are the Islamic legal system
and the customary law legal system.
• Common law is the legal tradition which evolved in England from the 11th
century onwards. It is defined as that ‘part of the law of England formulated,
developed and administered by the common law courts, based originally on the
common customs of the country and unwritten’.
• Common law is the foundation of private law, not only for England, Wales and
Ireland, but also in forty - nine U.S. states, nine Canadian provinces and most
countries which first received that law as colonies of the British Empire and
which, in many cases, have preserved it as independent States of the British
Commonwealth.
• The main characteristic features of the English common law system are the
doctrine of precedent and the practice of the adversarial system. However,
there are other characteristic features worth noting. These include the fact that
Common law judges are appointed from among the practicising lawyers and
need not undergo any specialised training. Also, the doctrine of equity is given
a lot of emphasis when compared to the civil law legal systems.
• ‘Civil law’ may be defined as ‘that legal tradition which has its origin in Roman
law, as codified in the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian, and as subsequently
developed in Continental Europe and around the world’. Civil law eventually
divided into two streams: the codified Roman law (as seen in the French Civil
Code of 1804 and its progeny and imitators - continental Europe, Québec and
Louisiana being examples); and uncodified Roman law (as seen in Scotland
and South Africa).
• The main characteristic features of the Civil law system are the prevalence of
codes and the practice of the inquisitorial system. Unlike in common law
jurisdictions, civil law jurisdictions place very little emphasis on the doctrines of
precedent and equity. Further, civil law judges undergo specialised training.
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
What does it mean to talk of law being both written yet unwritten? It
is crucial to keep emphasising the nature of the common law
tradition. In his Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765−69),
Blackstone was careful to describe the common law as ‘unwritten
law’ in contrast with the written law of statutes or codes. He was
familiar with the common law as a form of oral tradition derived from
general customs, principles and rules handed down from generation
to generation by the court lawyers and judges who participated in a
common life by eating and drinking in one of the Inns of Courts to
which all had to belong. Eventually this oral tradition was reflected in
the reports of the decisions of the important court and the
‘knowledge’ was then stored in a ‘written’ form, namely the law or
case Reports. You should note, however, that there was no
organized system of court reporting until the late nineteenth century
and prior to that all reports were private initiatives (made by barristers
who were in the courts and circulated privately for a fee to
supplement the barrister’s income).
Moreover, the relationship of the Law Reports and the common law
is not straightforward. For it was traditionally held that the words
of the Law Reports themselves were not the common law, but
that the decisions of the courts as reflected in the Law Reports
provide authorities for what the common law can be argued to
be. In other words, and this is the ‘mysterious’ bit, the common law
is always something more than what is written down! What is written
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
a litigation system in which the trial is the distinct and separate climax
to the litigation process;
the fact that the parties to the dispute essentially control proceedings
and that there is an emphasis on the presentation of oral argument
by counsel. The role of the judiciary is more reactive than proactive.
Given the parties’ opportunity and responsibility for mounting their
own case, the system is more participatory;
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
in litigation, the fact that no rigid separation exists between the stages
of the trial and pre-trial in court cases. Legal proceedings are viewed
as a continuous series of meetings, hearings and written
communications during which evidence is introduced, witnesses
heard and motions made;
the fact that a greater proportion of the effort and expense of dispute
determination through litigation falls on the state.
It is the combination of these elements within each of the two families of common
law and civil law and their respective court procedures and practices which permit
the shorthand descriptors of ‘adversarial’ and ‘inquisitorial’ to be used. In the
classical adversarial form of trial:
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
… the judge sits to hear and determine the issues raised by the parties, not
to conduct an investigation or examination on behalf of society at large …
So firmly is all this established in our law that the judge is not allowed in a
civil dispute to call a witness whom he thinks might throw some light on the
facts. He must rest content with the witnesses called by the parties.
(See Jones v National Coal Board [1957] 2 QB 55, 63−64 per Denning
LJ.)
• Customary law is the oldest form of law known to man worldwide. It consists
of customs, practices and beliefs that are accepted by a given society as
obligatory rules of conduct. It is not enacted but grows or develops with time.
It expresses itself not in a succession of words, but in a course of conduct. It
has no definite authors; there is no person or defined human agency one can
praise or bless for its being good or bad.1
organic or living laws of the indigenous people, which regulate their lives
and transactions;
unrecorded tradition and history of the people, which has “grown” with
the “growth” of the people to stability and eventually become an
intrinsic part of their customs; or
1
L Fuller, 1968
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• In order for a custom to be legally binding, it must meet four requisites. It must be:
1. reasonable;
2. long established; 3. uniformly observed; and
4. certain.
Note: Even where a custom is reasonable and certain and has fulfilled all the specified
essentials, the court may still refuse to enforce it for the following reasons:-
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(b) It is incompatible with any law at the time being in force or other currently
binding customs;
QUESTION: Is a rule of customary law repugnant to natural justice, equity and good
conscience merely because it is inconsistent with or contrary to the English
Law?note this question
• A customary law must be proved by strong evidence in any of the following ways:
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1. It is not codified. For this reason it is uncertain and vague; and only in
the minds of those who administer it or those who are subjects to it
especially the custodian of traditions and customs; and
2.5.1 Introduction
• Islamic law is a body of rules which gives practical expression to the religious faith
and aspirations of the Muslim. The fundamental tenet of Islam is total and
unqualified submission to the will of Allah, which is defined by Islamic law in terms
of a comprehensive code of behaviour covering all aspects of life.
• Islamic law started with the advent of Islam. It derives from Mohammed’s mission
and its bases are the Qu’ran and the Sunna. The overall goal of the Islamic law is
to promote welfare of mankind. This goal in broad general terms implies, among
others, to ensure growth and justice and in specific terms relates to the protection
of religion, life, reason, progeny and property.
1
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
UNIT 3
Zambia has a dual legal system made up of the tribe specific customary laws and
the ‘received law’. English law is the received law and is based on the English
Common law and system. But just what is English law and how was it received in
Zambia?
When described as ‘received law’ in former British colonies and protectorates, the
term ‘English law’ refers to “the common law, the doctrines of equity and the
statutes of general application which were in force in England on a particular cut –
off date”. In the case of Zambia, the cut – off date is 17th August, 1911. The English
Law (Extent of Application) Act, CAP 11, whose long title is “An Act to declare the
extent to which the Law of England applies in the Republic” provides, in section 2,
as follows:
Subject to the provisions of the Constitution of Zambia and to any other
written law-
(a) the common law;
(b) the doctrines of equity;
1
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(c) the statutes which were in force in England on the 17th August, 1911
(being the commencement of the Northern Rhodesia Order in Council,
1911); and
(d) any statutes of later date than that mentioned in paragraph (c) in force
in England, now applied to the Republic, or which hereafter shall be
applied thereto by any Act or otherwise;
shall be in force in the Republic.
Unlike the French, Belgians, Italians and the Dutch, the English did not have a ready
– made Code to carry to their territories in Africa. Rather, they brought their
common law, as supplemented by their own and territorial legislation. The modes
of introducing English law in the newly acquired British territories varied depending
on the manner in which a particular territory was acquired. But in the main, they
were five namely:
1
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
iii. General reception of all English law on a particular topic (e.g. the law of
crime, the law of real property) by local ordinance;
iv. Adoption of specific English enactments: e.g. under the British Acts
Extension Act, Cap 10 of the laws of Zambia, the following English
enactments were adopted as applying in Zambia i.e. the Conveyancing Act,
1911; the Forgery Act, 1913;the Industrial and Provident Societies
(Amendment) Act, 1913; the Larceny Act, 1916; The Bills of Exchange (Time
of Noting) Act, 1917; the Married Women (Maintenance) Act, 1920; the
Gaming Act, 1922; the Industrial and Provident Societies (Amendment) Act,
1928; the Limitation Act, 1939; and the Law Reform (Enforcement of
Contracts) Act, 1954.
N:B Please note that these have been uplifted from the 1995 edition of
the Laws of Zambia. It is therefore note an updated version of the British
enactments applicable to Zambia. It is also possible that some of these
British Statutes have since been replaced by local legislation.
2
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Companies Act while the Matrimonial Causes Act No. 20 of 2007 is based on
the 1973 British Matrimonial Causes Act.
When the different modes of reception of English law discussed above are
considered, one comes to the conclusion that English law was introduced in Zambia
largely by means of mode (b) i.e. introduction by the imperial government by Order
in Council or Act of the imperial parliament. In this regard, the English law (Extent
of Application) Act, Cap 11 of the laws of Zambia is worth noting.
However, one cannot discount the contribution of modes (c), (d) and (e) in which
case the British Acts Extension Act, Cap 10 of the laws of Zambia is worth noting.
It is worth noting that in terms of practice and procedure, the Zambian law still
resorts to English law even now. This is evident in the provisions of some Zambian
Acts of Parliament e.g. section 12 of the Subordinates Court Act provides that “the
jurisdiction vested in Subordinate Courts shall be exercised (so far as regards
practice and procedure) in the manner provided by this Act and the Criminal
Procedure Code, or by such rules and orders of court as may be made pursuant to
this Act and the Criminal Procedure Code, and, in default thereof, in substantial
conformity with the law and practice for the time being observed in England in the
county courts and courts of summary jurisdiction”. Meanwhile, section 14 of the
same Act makes it very clear that “All British Acts declared by any Act to extend or
apply to Zambia shall be in force so far only as the circumstances of Zambia permit;
and, for the purpose of facilitating the application of the said British Acts, it shall be
lawful for a Subordinate Court to construe the same with such verbal alterations,
not affecting the substance, as may be necessary to make the same applicable to
the proceedings before the court; and every magistrate or officer of court, having
or exercising functions of the like kind or analogous to the functions of a magistrate
or officer referred to in any such law, shall be deemed to be within the meaning of
the enactments thereof relating to such lastmentioned magistrate or officer”.
2
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The High Court and Supreme Court Acts have similar provisions. Section 10 of the
High Court Act provides that “the jurisdiction vested in the Court shall, as regards
practice and procedure, be exercised in the manner provided by this Act and the
Criminal Procedure Code, or by any other written law, or by such rules, order or
directions of the Court as may be made under this Act, or the said Code, or such
written law, and in default thereof in substantial conformity with the law and
practice for the time being observed in England in the High Court of Justice”.
Interestingly, section 11 (1) of the same Act goes a step further by importing the
English law on probate. It provides that “the jurisdiction of the Court in divorce and
matrimonial causes and matters shall, subject to this Act and any rules of court, be
exercised in substantial conformity with the law and practice for the time being in
force in England”. Subsection (2) of section 11 further declares that “the law and
practice for the time being in force for the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Divisions
of the High Court of Justice in England with respect to the Queen's Proctor shall,
subject to rules of court and to any rules made under the provisions of the Colonial
and Other Territories (Divorce Jurisdiction) Acts, 1926 to 1950, of the United
Kingdom, apply to the Attorney-General”.
Meanwhile, section 8 of the Supreme Court Act, Cap 25 provides that “the
jurisdiction vested in the Court shall, as regards practice and procedure, be
exercised in the manner provided by this Act and rules of court:
Provided that if this Act or rules of court do not make provision for any
particular point of practice and procedure, then the practice and procedure
of the Court shall be-
2
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Where there is a specific adoption of English law on a particular topic, only so much
of the English law as is specifically adopted will apply. The procedure for bringing
about such a specific adoption is the enactment of a local piece of legislation which
merely adopts a named English statute as part of the law of the ‘receiving’ country,
with minor amendments (method (d) above). Today, however, the tendency is to
draft a local ordinance, which although perhaps reflecting many of the features of
an English model, yet permits a greater degree of adaptation of English law to local
needs (method (e) above).
Where there has been a general reception of English law, the actual content of
English law received is not at all ascertained at the time of reception, because all
“the common law, the doctrines of equity, and the statutes of general application
which were in force in England” at the date of reception in the ‘receiving’ country
are taken as applying in that country. According to Dr. Munalula, “the significance
of the general reception of English law in this manner is that it provides the residual
law (i.e source of law of last resort) of the territory, to which reference is made in
the absence of any express rule deriving from specifically local law”.
QUESTION: To what extent can the received English law, or the cases on which it
rests (since it is derived in part from judge-made law, the common law
and equity) be still consulted or applied even where there is an express
local enactment? This is the problem of English judicial decisions in
African colonial courts, which is dealt in UNIT 6 of this course.
2
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The Zambian Court system as it exists today is a product of the court system
introduced by the British Colonists when the present day Zambia was acquired at
the beginning of 20th Century.
At the time the British colonists acquired North-Western Rhodesia in 1899 and
North – Eastern Rhodesia in 1900, some form of judicial system in the name of tribal
courts was already in existence administering customary law. However, this tribal
judicial system was not an elaborate judicial system. It was not until the coming
into effect of the Barotseland North-Western Rhodesia Order in Council of 1899
that an elaborate judicial system was first established in the North- Western part
of today’s Zambia.
In the Order in Council, provision was made for the appointment of judges and
magistrates thereby paving way for the establishment of the High Court and
Subordinate Courts for the territory. The Order in Council also expressly stated that
except where otherwise stated in the Order, English law was to apply in the
territory. And although Article 9 of the Order in Council provided some form of
protection of customary laws, no official recognition was extended to the tribal
courts themselves. The Article provided as follows:
The High Commissioner in issuing such proclamations shall respect any native
laws or customs by which the civil relations of any native chiefs, tribes or
populations under her Majesty’s protection are now regulated except so far
as the same may be incompatible with the exercise of her majesty’s power
and jurisdiction.
The North-Eastern Rhodesia Order in Council of 1900 relating to the part of today’s
Zambia not covered by the Barotseland North-Western Rhodesia Order in Council
of 1899 established an even more elaborate judicial system than had the
Barotseland North-Western Rhodesia Order in Council. A High Court was created
with civil and criminal jurisdiction over all cases in the territory. There was also
provision for appeals from the High Court to her Majesty in Council in relation to
civil cases if the amount involved reached a set threshold. For Criminal cases, the
High Commissioner was given power ‘to remit or commute in whole or in part any
2
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
sentence of the High Court. Magistrate’s Courts were also created with a specific
provision that anyone dissatisfied with the decision of a Magistrate may appeal to
the High Court.
On 4th May, 1911, the Northern Rhodesia Order in Council of 1911, revoking the
Barotseland North-Western and North-Eastern Orders in Council and merging the
two territories into one jurisdiction, was promulgated. Its provisions on the Court
system closely followed the pattern of the North-Eastern Rhodesia Order in Council
of 1900. The material difference was how High Court Judges were appointed. Tribal
Courts were being established, Magistrate Courts were being expanded and a Penal
Code for the territory was being developed.
In 1929, official recognition was given to the Native Courts (today’s Local Courts).
This was done through the enactment of the Native Courts Ordinance of 1929.
Meanwhile, the Magistrate’s Courts were expanded and the Penal Code developed
in 1933. In the same year, the High Court Ordinance clarified the High Court’s
position vis-à-vis the Magistrate’s Courts, extended the powers and jurisdiction of
the High Court for Northern Rhodesia to those of the High Court of Justice of
England and elaborated on the rules and procedure to be followed by the court in
cases involving customary law.
2
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
In 1936, the Native Courts Ordinance was amended to facilitate the establishment
of urban Native courts. The decision to create urban Native courts was necessitated
by the growing numbers of Africans who were migrating from rural areas to work
in urban areas. Thus, the urban Native courts were intended to carter for the rural
dwellers turned urban dwellers.
From the establishment of urban native courts in 1936 to 1960, statutory changes
in the judicial structure of Northern Rhodesia were relatively minor. But with the
coming of independence in 1964, several changes were introduced in what was
now the Zambian Judicial system. There was established for the first time a Court
of Appeal for Zambia.
(c) The Zambian Court system from 1973 to date
In 1973, the Court of Appeal was abolished and replaced by the Supreme Court of
Zambia. Another major change was the establishment, in early 1990s, of the
Industrial Relations Court which, until then, had been operating as an Industrial
Relations Tribunal. Another notable change came through the enactment, in 1992,
of the Small Claims Court, Cap 47 of the laws of Zambia. It is pursuant to this Act
that the Small Claims Courts, currently on pilot in Lusaka and Ndola, have been
created.
The result is that the current Zambian Court system, starting with the highest court,
is as follows:
2
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The current draft drat constitution has proposed the establishment of a Court of
Appeal and a Constitutional Court. If established, the Court of Appeal will be at the
level between the Supreme Court and the High Court while the Constitutional Court
will be at the same level as the Supreme Court. The Constitutional Court will
actually be a Division of the Supreme Court.
Like Courts of several countries whose legal systems are based on the English
common law system, the Zambian Courts follow the principle of stare decisis. The
principle has been part of Zambia’s judicial system since the introduction of English
law during the colonial days. However, the post-independence approach to the
principle is not the same as the pre-independence approach.
2
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
because there was automatic application of English substantive and procedural law
to the near complete exclusion of any inputs based on local needs.
Even in cases dealing with uniquely local concepts e.g. witchcraft, the Courts
insisted on referring to the then current laws and standards of England. In nearly
all the more ordinary decisions that have been published, the needs and public
policies of Northern Rhodesia were completely ignored in favour of any English case
or rule found to be closest in point.
It may be noted that very few Northern Rhodesian decided civil cases appeared in
published reports and the explanation advanced for this was that “most of the
Judgments and decisions turned upon the construction of English law of contracts,
torts etc and that very few of such cases threw any light on the law peculiar to
Northern Rhodesia.” The only major exception to the pattern of reflexive reliance
on the correctness of English rules and decisions tended to occur in cases dealing
with the law of sedition and civil liberties (in which the Courts were harsher than in
England) and in cases where the level of education and ‘development’ of individuals
were at issue (in which the Courts displayed an embarrassing paternalism).
Thus, before independence, the dogma of ‘stare decisis’ was routinely used, often
on a mechanical basis. What is important to note, though, is that while this
mechanical approach to the principle of stare decisis may have suited the needs of
a rather poorly trained and inadequately staffed judicial system, it contributed very
little to the development of rules of law suited to the conditions of the country or
2
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The new thinking meant that the Zambian Courts could no longer take a mechanical
approach to the principle of stare decisis. It also meant that it was time for Zambian
Courts to view law as an instrument of social change and that as the Zambian
Society and policies changed, so too must the law be adjusted. Under such
conditions, it was inevitable that the method of the law would turn away from
automatic recourse to past precedents, especially precedent from outside the
country, towards consideration of the practical needs of society as perceived by the
law-makers.
Not surprisingly, therefore, the decisions of Zambian Courts made after
independence reveal that the former rigid adherence to the doctrine of stare
decisis has been relaxed and that the new approach is based on considerations of
public policy and less on pure, policy-neutral legal authority. The Supreme Court
has since explicitly stated that it is not bound by past decisions: “The United States
2
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Supreme Court, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Ireland, the ultimate Courts of
Canada, Australia, South Africa and most European Countries, hold themselves free,
if they think it right to do so, to refuse to follow a previous decision. Recently, the
House of Lords in England has abandoned its rigid adherence to the rule of stare
decisis. I have no doubt that this Court as the ultimate Court of appeal for Zambia
is not absolutely bound by its previous decisions.”
Mention must be made that the capacity of Zambian Courts to break from the past
precedents also extends to precedents from jurisdictions other than Zambia.
Further, cases from the Northern Rhodesia Courts are not binding on Zambia’s
Courts today. Nor are English cases and cases from other common law jurisdiction.
It should also be noted that a similar flexibility has been exercised with regard to
the interpretation of statutes copied from or modeled on English legislation. The
Zambian Courts now firmly declare that statutes can be construed only in their own
context, regardless of what the position of various foreign authorities may be.
Despite the foregoing, it can be safely stated that the doctrine of stare decisis is still
a very powerful notion in Zambian Courts today and continues to exercise a lot of
influence in the law. Even in decisions in which the Courts have expressed their
unwillingness to be bound by the past, especially English decisions, they have more
often than not regarded themselves as persuaded by such precedent “in the
highest degree”.
(d) Conflicts between received English law and the customary law
3
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
i. What conflicts arose between the received English law and customary law
and how were they resolved?
Conflicts between customary law and received English law were of course
inevitable. One such conflict would arise when a white settler and an African were
involved in the same law suit. In such a case, English law was held to be applicable
as customary law was only applicable where the parties involved in the law suit
were exclusively Africans.
A second problem arose when customary law was clearly the applicable law but
was substantively abhorrent to the European Judge or magistrate. In such
instances, the judge or magistrate had 3 options at his disposal:
1. The first option was to merely disregard the advice of the assessors as to
what the law was or what the facts were. Reason? The court was, and is still
not bound to follow the opinion of assessors.
2. The second option was to find a direct conflict between the customary law
and the received English law. Recall that Section 12 of the Local Courts Act,
CAP 29 provides that customary law that is incompatible with the provisions
of any written law “shall not be applicable. Section 16 of the subordinate
Courts Act, CAP 28 has a similar provision.
3. The third option was for the Judge to use the “repugnancy” standard to reject
the application of customary law. This is because under the received English
law, customary law was not applicable if it was regarded as “repugnant to
natural justice, equity and good conscience”. See Section 16 of Cap 28; and
Section 12 of Cap 29.
3
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The English standard. This was made clear in Matengula V LRNR 148,151(1951) in
which the Court cited the repugnancy provisions of the statutes and held that the
“pointing out” tradition was unacceptable as ”against justice as we people in
England see it.” See also Kaniki v Jairus (1967) ZR, 71 (HC); and Gwao Bin Kilimo v
Kisundi Bin Ifuti, 4 TLR 63 (1938). Extracts of the judgments in these two cases are
found in the book ‘Legal Process: Zambian cases, legislation and commentaries”.
3
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
UNIT 4
4.0 Introduction
In its simplest terms, the phrase “sources of law” simply refers to the various
materials from which the law that we use is gotten from. To a very large
extent, these materials are a product of the country’s constitutional set up
as well as the historical basis of the country’s legal system.
In Zambia, the major sources of law are the Constitution; Acts of Parliament;
Delegated legislation; Judicial precedent; Customary law; Common law,
Equity and English statutes; international law; and modern textbooks.
i. Constitution of Zambia
The Constitution of Zambia is the primary source of law in Zambia. It is the
primary source of law because it is the supreme law of Zambia and if any
other law is inconsistent with it, that other law, to the extent of the
inconsistency, is void. Further, it binds all persons in the Republic of Zambia
including all Legislative, Executive and Judicial organs of the State at all
levels.2
That the Constitution is the supreme law of Zambia entails that the existence
and validity of other laws in the country depends on the extent to which such
other laws are consistent with the provisions of the constitution. This
relationship between the constitution and other laws was ably explained in
2
See Article 1(3) and (4) of the Constitution
3
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
the case of Thomas Mumba vs. The Attorney General 3 In that case, Mr.
Justice DK Chirwa had this to say:
The case of Thomas Mumba just referred to is one of those cases which confirms
the position that the validity of all other laws depends on the extent to which such
laws are consistent with the provisions of the constitution. In that case, the
applicant was standing trial in the subordinate court for an offence under the
Corrupt Practices Act. Section 53 (1) of the Act required that where such an accused
elected to say something in his defence, he had to say it on oath only (thus
excluding the option to make an unsworn statement). The defence submitted that
the provisions of section 53(1) of the Act were in contravention of Article 20 (7) of
the Constitution.
At the hearing of the matter in the High Court, Counsel for the Applicant submitted
that the provisions of section 53 (1) of the Corrupt Practices Act contravened the
provisions of Article 20 (7) of the Constitution in that the said section compelled
the accused, if he elected to say something in his defence to give evidence, whereas
Article 20 (7) of the Constitution stated that one, in a criminal matter, should not
be compelled to give evidence. It was submitted that since the section was in
conflict with the Article of the Constitution, it should be declared null and void and
unconstitutional.
3
(1984) ZR, 38
3
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
was still maintained. The State further submitted that all the section in question
said was that if the accused person elected to say something he had to do so on
oath. After considering arguments from both counsel, the learned Judge had this
to say:
There is no doubt that the provisions of Section 53 (1) of the Corrupt Practices
Act is in direct conflict with the provisions of Article 20 (7) of the Constitution.
Under ordinary interpretation of statutes one would have said that the latest
Act impliedly repealed or amended the old Act but there can be no implied
amendment to the Constitution. The Constitution is sacrosanct and it cannot
be amended by implication. To amend the Constitution certain requirements
have to be met as provided for in Article 80 of the Constitution and a
certificate has to be issued or inserted on the Bill as provided for under Section
5 (3) of the Acts of Parliament Act, Cap. 16. The Corrupt Practices Act does
not in its own body purport to amend the Constitution. Section 64 of the Act
amends the Penal Code and Section 65 ceases the application of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1916 of the United Kingdom to Zambia. Section
53 (1) of the Act, therefore, is blatantly in conflict with Article 20 (7) of the
Constitution. This conflict cannot even be resolved by reference to Article 20
(12) of the Constitution as sub-article (7) is not mentioned in that sub-article.
Neither can it be resolved by reference to the general derogatory Article 26
as Article 20 is deliberately left out”.
The case of Christine Mulundika & 7 Others vs. The People4 is another case which
confirms the position that the validity of all other laws depends on their conformity
with the constitution. In that case, the appellants had challenged the
constitutionality of certain provisions of the Public Order Act, Cap. 104 of the Laws
4
(1995) ZR,
3
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
of Zambia, especially section 5(4) which required any person wishing to hold a
peaceful assembly to obtain a permit and contravention of which was criminalised
by section 7 of the same Act. The challenge related both to the requirement of a
permit and the prosecution based on the absence of such permit and was grounded
on the fundamental freedoms and rights guaranteed by
Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution. A subsidiary challenge related to the
exemption of certain offices from the need to obtain a permit which is said to be
discriminatory contrary to Article 23 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court held that the then section 5(4) of the Public Order Act, Cap. 104
of the Laws of Zambia contravened Articles 20 and 21 of the constitution and was
null and void and therefore invalid for unconstitutionality. The Court further held
that the invalidity and the constitutional guarantee of the rights of assembly and
expression precluded the prosecution of persons and the criminalisation of
gatherings in contravention of section 5(4) of the Act. “Accordingly”, stated the
court, “a prosecution based on paragraph (a) of section 7 which depended on
subsection 4 of section 5 would itself be inconsistent with the constitutional
guarantees and equally invalid”.
Article 44 (3) (b) of the constitution empowers the President of the Republic of
Zambia to initiate legislation for submission to and consideration by the National
Assembly. But the constitution is silent on whether Members of the National
Assembly can initiate their own Bills.
5
See Article 78(1) of the Constitution.
3
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
In practice, Members of the National Assembly are at liberty to initiate their own
Bills for submission to and consideration by the National Assembly. However,
certain Bills with financial implications may only be introduced on the
recommendation of the President.
Types of Bills
These are also referred to as Public Bills because they affect the public as a whole.
A Government Bill is presented by His Honour the Vice –President or a Cabinet
Minister. The bill comes with a Memorandum signed by the Attorney General. The
Memorandum gives objectives and reasons why the Bill should be passed.
This type of Bill is usually sponsored by a person or persons with private interests
to advance. The Bill aims at enacting or altering the law that only affects a particular
person or body of persons such as private companies. For example, a Bill entitled
“The Moslem Marriage Recognition Bill” would enable a law to be passed that
would recognise Moslem marriages.
A Private Bill may be presented on a petition by the promoter who could be a single
person or group of persons. The promoter of a Private Bill is also responsible for
the costs incidental to the passage of the Bill in the National Assembly.
This is like a Government Bill. A Private Members’ Bill is also a Public Bill and the
cost associated with its drafting and passage in the National Assembly is met from
public funds. The only difference between a Government Bill and a Private
Members’ Bill is that it is introduced in the National Assembly, by a Private Member
of the National Assembly i.e. a back-bencher.
3
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
A Hybrid Bill is a Bill which, although general in its intended application, affects
certain private or local interests. The Standing Orders give the Speaker the power
to determine whether a Bill is hybrid or not.
In Zambia, the most common type of Bills that are introduced in the National
Assembly are Government Bills and Private Members’ Bills.
Stages of a Bill
The first reading of the Bill is a formality. A Bill is presented and read for the first
time. The presentation of the Bill is done by the Minister or the Private Member
responsible. Only the title of the Bill is read out. There is no time limit that is
provided for between the time that the Bill is published by the Government Printer
and when it should be read for the first time in the National Assembly except for a
constitutional Bill. In the case of a Constitutional Bill, it should be published in the
Government Gazette for not less than thirty (30) days before the First Reading.
After the Bill is read for the first time, the Bill is referred to the appropriate
Committee for consideration. The Committee has the power to summon witnesses
to contribute to the efficacy and objectives of the Bill. Witnesses include Ministers,
Permanent Secretaries and other stakeholders. Witnesses should convince the
Committee on the purposes and appropriateness of the Bill. It is important,
therefore, that the witnesses that appear before the Committee are adequately
prepared.
The proceedings of the Committees are open to the public and the media. The
Committee produces a report that is taken into account during the second reading
stage of the Bill.
3
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
This is the most important stage in the legislative process of a Bill. At this stage, the
principle behind the Bill is debated in the House in great detail. The Cabinet
Minister or Member responsible for the Bill discusses the principles and objectives
of the Bill and takes into account the contents of the report of the
Committee that considered the Bill. At the end of the debate, the House decides
whether to proceed with the Bill or not. If the majority of the Members choose to
proceed, the speaker orders the Bill to be read a second time. If on the other hand,
the majority decline, then the Bill is withdrawn and it cannot be reintroduced
during the same session.
In the case of a Constitutional Bill, when the question is put by the Speaker that the
Bill be read a second time, a vote is immediately conducted and the Bill requires
the support of at least two-thirds of all Members of the House.
At this stage, the Bill is ordered to be considered by the Committee of the whole
House. The Committee examines the Bill in detail, clause by clause. If there are any
amendments to the Bill either as a result of the Committee’s Report on the Bill or
by the Cabinet Minister or Private Member responsible for the Bill, the
amendments are presented to the Committee of the Whole House at this stage for
adoption or otherwise.
The Deputy Speaker is the Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole House. At
the stage of the Committee of the Whole House, Members of Parliament are free
to speak more than once and are free to introduce various amendments to the
Bill.
The Report Stage is when the amendments made at Committee Stage are reported
to the Whole House. At this stage, the House has an opportunity to reflect on the
amendments. Only additional amendments to the Bill not moved at Committee
Stage are considered.
3
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
If a Bill has not been amended at Committee Stage, the Third Reading is preceded
forthwith without the Report Stage.
A Bill is presented to the President for his assent only after three days from the date
of the Third Reading of the Bill except for Bills relating to raising of revenue and
expenditure. If the President gives his assent, the Bill becomes an Act of Parliament
or law and takes effect immediately it is published in the Government Gazette.
The President can, however, withhold his assent to any Bill, in which case the Bill is
returned to the National Assembly. Such a Bill is returned to the House with a
message for the National Assembly to reconsider the Bill. If the National Assembly
thereafter passes the Bill on a Motion supported by a two-thirds majority, the Bill
is again presented to the President. When a Bill is again presented to the President
for assent, the President should assent to the Bill within twenty-one days of its
presentation unless he sooner dissolves Parliament.
4
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Common law is the foundation of private law, not only for England, Wales and
Ireland, but also in forty - nine U.S. states, nine Canadian provinces and most
countries which first received that law as colonies of the British Empire and which,
in many cases, have preserved it as independent States of the British
Commonwealth.
6
Cap 2 of the Laws of Zambia. See also Article 139(1) of the Constitution
7
See subsection 4 of section 20 of Cap 2.
4
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
On the other hand, equity is a body of rules which seek to advance what is ‘just’
and ‘fair’ in the circumstances of each case. For this reason, equity is said to denote
‘natural justice’. Equity developed as a result of defects in the common law.8 The
importance of the doctrine of equity is that whenever there is a conflict between
law and equity, the latter (equity) prevails.
The extent to which common law, equity and English statutes are a source of law
in Zambia is spelt out in the English law (Extent of Application) Act9. Section 2 of
the Act provides that
(a)
the common law;
(b)
the doctrines of equity;
(c)
Statutes which were in force in England on the 17th
August, 1911 (being the commencement of the
Northern Rhodesia Order in Council, 1911); and
(d) any statutes of later date than that mentioned in
paragraph (c) in force in England, now applied to
the Republic, or which hereafter shall be applied
thereto by any Act or otherwise;
shall be in force in the Republic”.
It is important to note that notwithstanding (despite) section 2 of the English law
(Extent of Application) Act, there are certain British Statutes which are still a source
of law in Zambia despite coming into force after 17th August, 1911. These are
specified by the British Acts Extensions Act.10 They include the Conveyancing Act,
1911; the Forgery Act, 1913; the Industrial and Provident Societies (Amendment)
Act, 1913; the Larceny Act, 1916; The Bills of Exchange (Time of Noting) Act, 1917;
the Married Women (Maintenance) Act, 1920; the Gaming Act, 1922; the Industrial
8
The defects are discussed in UNIT 3
9
Cap 11 of the Laws of Zambia
10
Cap 10 of the Laws of Zambia
4
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
and Provident Societies (Amendment) Act, 1928; the Limitation Act, 1939; and the
Law Reform (Enforcement of Contracts) Act, 1954.
Mention must also be made that notwithstanding (despite) the provisions of the
English law (Extent of Application) Act, Cap 11 of the laws of Zambia, all English
Statutes that apply to Zambia by virtue of that Act serve only as ‘reserve’ sources
of law in Zambia. This means that we can only resort to such English statutes if our
own Zambian Acts of Parliament are silent on a particular issue/matter. This
position was confirmed by the High Court in the case of The People vs. Shamwana
& Others11 In that case, the accused were charged with treason. Proving the case
of treason was dependent on Act No. 35 of 1973. Before this Act, the law provided
that one could not be convicted of treason if there were two witnesses to an overt
act or two witnesses who each observed a separate overt act of the same kind of
treason. This was the law in England and Zambia. But Act No. 35 of 1973 changed
the law in Zambia ensuring that there was no requirement as to a specific number
of witnesses to prove the offence of treason. After the Act came into force, the
offence of treason could be proved like any other criminal offence
Among the issues that were raised was whether the law applicable to the offence
was by virtue of the English Law (Extent of Application) Act, the English Treason Act
of 1795. The High Court ruled as follows:
“The English Law (Extent of Application) Act, Cap 4 is an enabling Act in that
in the absence any legislation in Zambia on any subject, English statutes
passed before 17 August will apply. Where Zambia enacts an Act with similar
provisions to an English Act, the Zambian Act is used not the English statute”.
The Court therefore concluded that the Zambian Act No. 35 of 1973 and not the
English Treason Act of 1795 was applicable to the offence with which the accused
stood charged. Accordingly, the accused were convicted.
11
(1982) ZR, 122
4
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Also worth noting is the fact that in terms of practice and procedure, the Zambian
legal system also relies heavily on English law. This is evident in the provisions of
the Subordinate Courts Act12; the High Court Act13; and the Supreme Court Act14.
Section 12 of the Subordinates Court Act provides that “the jurisdiction vested in
Subordinate Courts shall be exercised (so far as regards practice and procedure) in
the manner provided by this Act and the Criminal Procedure Code, or by such rules
and orders of court as may be made pursuant to this Act and the Criminal Procedure
Code, and, in default thereof, in substantial conformity with the law and practice
for the time being observed in England in the county courts and courts of summary
jurisdiction”.
Section 10 of the High Court Act, as read with section 2 of the High Court
(Amendment) Act No. 16 of 2002, has a similar provision. It provides that “the
jurisdiction vested in the Court shall, as regards practice and procedure, be
exercised in the manner provided by this Act and the Criminal Procedure Code, or
by any other written law, or by such rules, order or directions of the Court as may
be made under this Act, or the said Code, or such written law, and in default thereof
in substantial conformity with the law and practice for the time being observed in
England in the High Court of Justice provided that the Civil Court Practice 1999 (The
Green Book) of England or any other civil court practice rules issued after 1999 in
England shall not apply to Zambia unless they relate to matrimonial causes”.
In similar lines, section 8 of the Supreme Court Act, as read with section 2 of the
Supreme Court (Amendment) Act No. 15 of 2002, provides that “the jurisdiction
vested in the Court shall, as regards practice and procedure, be exercised in the
manner provided by this Act and rules of court:
Provided that if this Act or rules of court do not make provision for any
particular point of practice and procedure, then the practice and procedure
of the Court shall be-
12
Cap 28 of the Laws of Zambia
13
Cap 27 of the Laws of Zambia
14
Cap 25 of the Laws of Zambia
4
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
However, it is important to note that all British Acts declared by any Act to extend
or apply to Zambia are in force so far only as the circumstances of Zambia permit
and, for the purpose of facilitating the application of the such Acts, it is lawful for
any Court to construe the same with such verbal alterations, not affecting the
substance, as may be necessary to make the same applicable to the proceedings
before the court.
v. Judicial precedent15
The doctrine of precedent (Something that has been done before) is one of the
characteristic features of not only the English legal system but also all legal systems
founded upon the English common law system like Zambia.
Judicial precedent may be defined as “a judgement or decision of a court of law
cited as an authority for deciding a similar set of facts” or as “a case which serves
as an authority for the legal principle embodied in its decision”. The doctrine of
precedent declares that cases must be decided the same way when their material
facts are the same.
15
For more on the use, types, advantages and disadvantages of judicial Precedent see UNIT 6
4
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Other than the fact that customary law has been part of Zambia’s legal system since
colonial days, its existence is also expressly recognised by Article 23(4) (d) of the
Constitution of Zambia.
That customary law is a recognised source of law in Zambia is also evident by the
provisions of the Local Courts Act18 and the Subordinate Courts Act.
According to section 12 of the Local Courts Act, every Local Court has jurisdiction
to administer the African customary law applicable to any matter before it, as long
as such a law is not repugnant to natural justice or morality or incompatible with
the provisions of any written law. Further, any offence under African customary
law, where such law is not repugnant to natural justice or morality, may be dealt
with by a local court as an offence under such law notwithstanding that a similar
offence may be constituted by the Penal Code or by any other written law provided
that such local court shall not impose any punishment for such offence in excess of
the maximum permitted by the Penal Code or by such other written law for such
similar offence.
4
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
16
For more on the principles governing the application of customary law, see UNIT 2 17
L Fuller, 1968
18
Cap 29 of the Laws of Zambia
“Subject as hereinafter in this section provided, nothing in this Act shall
deprive a Subordinate Court of the right to observe and to enforce the
observance of, or shall deprive any person of the benefit of, any African
customary law, such African customary law not being repugnant to justice,
equity or good conscience, or incompatible, either in terms or by necessary
implication, with any written law for the time being in force in Zambia. Such
African customary law shall, save where the circumstances, nature or justice
of the case shall otherwise require, be deemed applicable in civil causes and
matters where the parties thereto are Africans, and particularly, but without
derogating from their application in other cases, in civil causes and matters
relating to marriage under African customary law, and to the tenure and
transfer of real and personal property, and to inheritance and testamentary
dispositions, and also in civil causes and matters between Africans and non-
Africans, where it shall appear to a Subordinate Court that substantial
injustice would be done to any party by a strict adherence to the rules of any
law or laws other than African customary law: Application of African
customary law
Provided that-
4
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Bilateral and multilateral agreements are a source of law in Zambia only if they have
been domesticated. Domestication simply means according a bilateral or
multilateral agreement the force of law so as to make it enforceable in the courts
of law. This is achieved through the enactment, by Parliament, of the relevant
enabling legislation.
4
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
That Bilateral or multilateral agreements are a source of law only if they have been
domesticated is exemplified by the case of Zambia Sugar Plc vs Fellow Nanzaluka.16
In that case, Mr Nanzaluka was employed by Zambia Sugar Plc in 1992. His
employment was terminated without notice in 1996. He was paid three months
salary in lieu of notice. He brought an action in the Industrial Relations Court. The
court accepted that the conditions of service had been complied with but held that
the action was contrary to the International Labour Convention No. 158 of 1982
which forbids termination of an employee’s contract of employment without valid
reasons. On appeal to the Supreme Court, it was held that international
instruments on any law although ratified and assented to by the state cannot be
applied unless they have been domesticated and that since Zambia had not yet
domesticated the International Labour Convention No. 158 of 1982, the convention
was inapplicable to Zambia.
The case of Attorney General vs. Roy Clark 17 also sheds light on the need for
international instruments to be domesticated before they become applicable to
Zambia. In this case, Mr. Roy Clark challenged his deportation from Zambia. It was
contended, inter alia, on behalf of Mr. Clark that the Minister of Home Affairs
should have taken into account Article 13 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights before deporting Mr. Clark because Zambia is a signatory to the
Covenant. The High Court accepted this argument. On appeal, this is what the
Supreme Court stated:
“….The learned trial Judge said that when deporting the respondent, the
Minister should have taken into consideration Article 13 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Zambia is a signatory. Article
13 requires that a potential deportee must be given an opportunity to be
heard unless there are compelling reasons of national security. It was Dr.
Matibini's submission that in this case, it has not been demonstrated that
there existed compelling reasons. Dr. Matibini ended his submissions on this
ground by saying the learned trial judge was on firm ground when he held
that it was unlawful to deport the respondent when there is no compelling
16
Appeal No. 82 of 2001
17
(2008) ZR, 38
4
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
On the other hand, the position with regard to the application of international
customary law is less clear. There is no Zambian decision on the issue although the
English position may provide some guidance. The English position is that customary
rules of international law are deemed to be part of the law of England and
applicable by British courts provided they do not conflict with statutory law and
have been determined by British courts of final authority.
18
(2008) ZR, 38 at 61
5
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
UNIT 5
5.0 STATUTORY INTERPRETATION
There are several reasons giving rise to the need for statutory interpretation.
These include:
1. The impossibility of asking individual MPs on what they meant of
any word that you do not understand in the statute - In our day to
day conversations, it is not uncommon, if someone says something that
you do not understand, for you to ask that person to explain what he/she
meant. Such an opportunity is impossible with written documents, not
less so with statutes.
5
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
and individual MPs cannot be put into the witness box to supplement or
interpret what has been formally enacted. Therefore, in practice, the
meaning of the words contained in the Act of Parliament is not
necessarily the meaning intended by any actual person in particular, but
the meaning that is conventionally attached to such words.
2. Draft persons sometimes refrain from using words which they
consider to be implied in what they have written - The problem with
this approach is that if different users of the statute are not familiar with
the implied meaning, the possibility of them coming up with different
meanings of the same provision arises.
3. Draft persons may use words or phrases with a core meaning
(which everybody knows and agrees) and a peripheral (also known
as ‘penumbra’) meaning which is not known by everyone.
For example, the word “vehicle” is generally taken to mean some kind of
a “motor” vehicle. But the same word may also cover an “ox-cat”.
5
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1. Literal rule of interpretation – This rule states that words used in the
statute must be construed in accordance with their “literal and
grammatical” meaning. The literal and grammatical meaning of the
words is also known as the plain or “natural and ordinary” meaning of
the words.
There are several cases illustrating the application of the literal rule
of interpretation. In Kenyon v Eastwood (1888) 57 LJ QB, 455 , an
Act of Parliament provided that orders for committal must be made
in “open court”. The Court held that an order made, not in the actual
open court room but in the room next to it (which was also open to
the public), was invalid.
5
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
from voting. This was notwithstanding the fact that the history of the
enactment shared that the intention was to test the loyalty, not the
religious creed, of the MPs.
5
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
In his judgment, Mr. Justice Bweupe had this to say: “The question
that arises in my view is: What is then meant by the phrase
‘specifying in detail’?” After some analysis on the issue, he continued
thus: “It seems to me, therefore, that in the construction of the statute
words should be taken in their literal meaning which is not
necessarily the dictionary sense but the sense in which the words
are used in common parlance. What then is the popular sense of the
phrase ‘specifying in detail’? The popular sense of the phrase in my
view is therefore that the detaining authority must furnish sufficient
information which should enable the detainee to direct his mind to it
when making his representations”. In the learned judge’s view, the
statement given to the applicant in this case did not contain sufficient
information. Consequently, the judge ordered the release of the
applicant.
NOTE: Also read Edward Mweshi Chileshe v ZCCM, SCZ Judgment No.
10 of 1996 in which the meaning of ‘social status’ as used in section
108 of the Industrial and Labour Relations Act, was considered.
5
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
2. Context rule of Interpretation – This rule states that where the words of
a statute are not clear or plain after using the literal rule, then such words
must be construed in the context in which they have been used in the
statute. In this regard, the context rule of statutory interpretation is
regarded as a modification of the literal rule of interpretation. The
context rule is sometimes expressed in the Latin maxim noscitur a sociis,
translated as “a word may be known by the company it keeps.”
Thus, the context rule of statutory interpretation allows one to look not
only at the rest of the section in which the word appears but at the
statutes as a whole, and even at earlier legislation dealing with the same
subject matter. This is because it is assumed that when Parliament
passes an Act, it probably has the earlier legislation in mind and
probably intended to use words with the same meaning as before.
5
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
There are several cases illustrating the application of the context rule of
statutory interpretation. English cases on the rule include Jewish Blind
Society Trustees v Henning (1961) 1WLR, 24; Ratcliffe v Ratclife
(1961) 1 WLR; 1455 and R v Price (1964) 2QB 76, among others.
In Zambia the case of Ntombizine Mudenda v The Attorney General
(1979) ZR, 245 sheds more light on the application of the context rule of
statutory interpretation. The case involved an application for a writ of
habeas corpus ad subjiciendum. The applicant was detained under
regulation 33 (1) of the Preservation of Public Security Regulations and
was served with the following grounds of detention. “That you on
unknown dates but during the year 1978 and October 1979 in collusion
with others yet unknown indulged in the illegal and illicit trafficking in
precious stones like emeralds”.
Counsel for the applicant contended that the grounds of detention were
too general, imprecise and vague and that the words ‘like emeralds’
were vague as they might be interpreted to mean precious stones, which
are similar to emeralds, in respect of which being in possession of or
trafficking in would not be a ground for detention. Mr. Justice Silungwe,
CJ, as he then was, stated thus:
“….the word ‘like’ in the context in which it was used here meant
that the precious stones were the ‘same as’ or ‘similar to’
emeralds. The question is: could a reasonable person have
understood the word in this way? …. There are only two types of
precious stones the trafficking in which is illegal, namely
diamonds and emeralds. It is therefore not misleading or vague
to use the phrase ‘like emeralds’ because it can only refer to
5
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
emeralds or diamonds and that is the case that the detainee has
to answer and she has every opportunity to do so”.
5
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
you qualify under section 3 of the Lands Act, you are warm
and dry. On strict interpretation of the Cabinet Circular and
Interpretation of the Local Government and Housing and the
University of Zambia circulars on the sale of houses, the
intention of Government becomes very clear. The intention
was to empower Zambians who were sitting tenants to
purchase pool houses. The Tribunal misdirected itself and
erred in ignoring the preamble”.
4. The mischief rule of Interpretation: This rule, also often known as the
rule in Heydon’s case, states that where a statute has been passed to
remedy a weakness in the law, the interpretation which will correct that
weakness (mischief) is the one to be adopted. Under this rule, it is
believed that for the sure and true interpretation of all statues, four things
are to be discerned and considered. These are:
(a) What was the common law before the making of the Act?
(b) What was the mischief and defect for which the common law
did not provide?
(c) What remedy has Parliament resolved and appointed to cure
the defect?
(d) Once the remedy provided for in the Act is known, the Act
must be construed in such a way as to suppress the mischief
and advance the remedy according to the true intent of the
Act.
Cases abound in which the mischief rule was applied. One such case is
Hutton v Esther Urban District Council (1973) 2 ALL ER 1123. In that
case, the council proposed to construct a sewer to drain surface water from
houses and roads and also to take flood water from a river. The most
5
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
economical line of the sewer would take straight through the claimant’s
bungalow, which would have to be demolished but might be rebuilt after the
sewer had been constructed. The Public Health Act, 1936 empowered the
council to construct a public sewer “in, on, or over any land”. The claimant
argued that the expression “land” did not include buildings and therefore,
the council had no power to demolish his bungalow. However, section 3 of
the Interpretation Act of 1889 (applicable at the time) provided that unless
a contrary intention appears, the expression ‘land’ includes buildings.
Applying the mischief rule, the Court of Appeal held that the Interpretation
Act was applicable and “land” therefore, included buildings. In
consequence, the council had power to demolish the claimant’s bungalow.
The Zambian case on the mischief rule is The People v Shamwana and
Others. In that case, the accused were charged with treason. Proving the
case was dependent on Act No. 35 of 1973 (Zambian Treason Act). Prior to
this Act, the law provided that one could not be convicted of treason unless
there were two witnesses to an overt act or two witnesses who each
observed a separate overt act of the same kind of treason. This was the law
in England and Zambia. But Act No. 35 of 1973 changed the law in Zambia
ensuring that there was no requirement as to a specific number of witnesses
to prove the offence of treason. After the Act came into force, the offence of
treason could be proved like any other criminal offence.
6
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
passed, what the mischief was which the old law did not provide and
the remedy provided by the statute to cure that mischief’.
“Nowadays, the Courts look at external aids for more than merely
identifying the mischief the statute is intended to cure. In adopting a
purposive approach to the interpretation of statutory language,
Courts seek to identify and give effect to the purpose of the
legislation. To the extent that extraneous materials assist in
identifying the purpose of the legislation, it is useful too”.
6
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
So stated, the purposive approach is wider than the mischief rule since it
does not suppose (as the mischief rule does) that all statutes are passed
for the purpose of remedying a mischief, as opposed to promoting some
social good or purpose. In recent years, the purposive approach has
supplemented both the literal rule and the mischief rule as the proper
approach to the ascertainment of Parliament’s will.
The close relation between the mischief rule and the purposive approach
came to light in the case of Gardiner vs Sevenoaks EDC (1950) 66, TLR,
1091. In that case, the local authority served a notice under the celluloid
and cinematograph film Act 1922 on the occupier of a cave where film was
stored, requiring him to comply with certain safety regulations. The cave
was described in the notice as “premises”. Gardiner, who was the occupier,
appealed against the notice on the ground that a cave could not be
considered ‘premises’ for the purposes of the Act. The Court held that whilst
it was not possible to lay down that every cave would be premises’ for all
purposes, the Act was a safety Act and was designed to protect persons in
the neighborhood and those working in the place of storage.
Therefore, under the “mischief rule”, this cave was ‘premises’ for the
purposes of the Act.
4(a) So what, then, is the distinction between the mischief rule and the
purpose approach?
Both the mischief rule and the purposeful approach aim to give effect to the
general purpose and intention behind the legislation. However,
1. mischief rule applies only where there is a gap in the common law
whereas purposive approach applies whether the area covered
by the enactment was previously within the domain of common
law or statute law;
6
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
5. The Golden rule of Interpretation: This rule states that a statute must
be construed in such a way as to produce a reasonable and sensible
result, even if this involves departing from the literal meaning of the
words. The rule allows the court to prefer a sensible meaning to an
absurd meaning where both are linguistically possible. Under this rule, it
does not matter that the absurd meaning is the more natural and obvious
meaning of the words. In short, this rule requires that statutes must be
construed in such a way as to avoid absurdity.
The case of Attorney General and MMD v. Lewanika and 4 others, SCZ
Judgment No. 2 of 1994 is one of the Zambian cases that illustrate the
application of the golden rule in Zambia. The case involved an appeal to the
portion of the High Court Judgement that applied the literal rule of
interpretation to the provisions of Article 71(2) (c) of the 1991 Zambian
Constitution.
The Respondents were members of the MMD. On 31st October, they stood
for elections on the MMD ticket. They won elections and took their seats in
the National Assembly. On 12th August, 1993, they announced their
resignation from the MMD prompting the MMD National Secretary to write
6
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
to the Speaker of the National Assembly informing him that the respondents
were no longer members of the MMD. Following the receipt of the
notification from the MMD National Secretary, the Speaker, on 27 th August,
1993, wrote the respondents informing them that in terms of Article 71(2)
(c) of the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia, the respondents ceased
to be MPs with effect from 13th August, 1993, the date when the MMD
National Secretary wrote the Speaker. The Respondents then petitioned the
Attorney General contending that although they had resigned from the MMD
on whose ticket they won the elections, they were still MPs and asked the
Court to declare the
Speaker’s decision in relation to their seats as null and void.
Using the literal rule of interpretation, the learned High Court judge
construed Article 71 (2) (c) of the Constitution as enacting that if an MP
leaves the party on whose ticket he or she was elected to the National
Assembly but does not join any political party, that person retains the seat
in Parliament as an independent MP. It is against this interpretation that the
Attorney General appealed. The gist of the appeal was that the learned trial
judge had misdirected herself by applying the literal rule of statutory
interpretation to Article 71 (2) (c) instead of the purposive rule of
interpretation. After discussing Counsel’s arguments at great length, the
Supreme Court observed thus:
“In the instant case, we have studied the judgment of the court below
and we find it sound and correct by applying the literal interpretation.
However, it is clear from the Shariz and Nothman cases that the
present trend is to move away from the rule of literal interpretation to
‘purposive approach’ in order to promote the general legislative
purpose underlying the provision. Had the learned trial judge
adopted the purposive approach she would undoubtedly have come
to a different conclusion. It follows, therefore, that whenever the strict
interpretation of statute gives rise to an unreasonable and unjust
situation, it is our view that judges can and should use their good
6
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
NOTE: Students are advised to note that in the Lewanika case referred to above; several
other rules of statutory interpretation were discussed. It is therefore
important that every student reads the case.
6. The ejusdem generis rule: This is a rule covering things of the same
species or type. The rule states that where general words follow
particular words, the general words must be construed as being limited
to persons or things within the class outlined by the particular words.
For example, the phrase ‘other animals’ in ‘dogs, cats and other animals’
must be construed to refer to animals of the domestic type and would
not be extended to cover animals such as elephants and camels which
are not domestic animals.
6
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
7. Expression unius exclusio alterius: This rule simply means that the
mention of one thing excludes others. Thus, under this rule, where
specific words are used and are not followed by general words, the Act
applies only to the instances mentioned. For example, where a statute
contains an express statement that certain statutes are repealed, there
is a presumption that other relevant statutes not mentioned are not
repealed.
6
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
the context of an illegitimate child, the rule expression unis est exclusion
alterius served to exclude the father of an illegitimate child for these
purposes as a ‘parent’. According to the Court of Appeal, the Act required
partiality to be decided on the basis of the mother alone and consequently,
the daughter of a Chinese mother was not a partial.
5.3 Presumptions
5.3.1 Introduction
6
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
upon a person, that power must be exercised in accordance with the rules
of natural justice. When Parliament creates a new crime, this is presumed
to be subject to certain defences at common law such as self-defence and
duress, and also (very frequently) to the requirement of the state of the mind
(intention, knowledge or recklessness). These are judge-made principles
required by our ideas of justice and grafted on the statute by
‘implication’ although there may be no words in the statute to suggest them”.
5.3.2 Definition
6
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
the age of 8 (in Zambia) is not criminally liable for his or her actions and
omissions.
iii. Presumptions of fact – These are inferences which may be drawn from a
given set of facts but not conclusively.
• It must be noted that presumptions are so many that there is no universally agreed
upon list of them all. Therefore, even the list that follows below is not exhaustive:
it is merely intended to introduce the student to some of the presumptions that may
be encountered in relation to the interpretation of statutes. The list is as follows:
6
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
“The purpose of the Act was manifestly to saddle the employer with liability
for defective plant of every sort with which the employee is compelled to
work in the course of his employment, and I can see no ground for excluding
particular types of chattel merely on the ground of their size or the element
on which they are designed to operate”.
The position is different in the United Kingdom (UK). It would appear that the
distinction between matters of procedure and matters of substance has since
disappeared. The new approach for the application of the presumption appears
to be that the issue should not be whether the matters involved are procedural
or substantial but rather whether the retrospective application of the law would
7
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
be unfair in the circumstances of each individual case. Read Yew Bon Tew v
Kenderaan Bas Mara (1982) 3 ALL ER, 833; Re A
Solicitor’s Clerk (1957) 3 ALL ER, 617; Secretary of State for Social
Services v Tunnicliffe (1991) 2 ALL ER, 712; and L’Office Cherifien des
Phosphates and another v Yamashita Steamship Co. Ltd: The Boucraa
(1994) 1 ALL ER, 20.
When such a problem arises, the courts will normally presume that Parliament
expected mens rea to be a precondition of guilt and accordingly they will refuse
to convict in its absence. However, this is a rebuttable presumption meaning
that if evidence is adduced to prove the contrary, the accused may be
convicted.
7
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
“Those who contend that a penalty may be inflicted must show that the
words of the Act distinctly enact that it shall be incurred under the present
circumstances. They must fail if the words are merely equally capable of a
construction that would, and one that would not, inflict the penalty’.
• As already noted above, presumptions are many and cannot all be covered here.
But students may wish to also familarialise themselves with the presumption
against gaining advantage from wrong doing; the presumption relating to
consolidating and codifying statutes; and the presumption relating to ‘and’ and
‘or’, among others.
5.4.1 Introduction
• Looking at UNIT 5.10 of the course outline for this course, one gets the impression
that the process of statutory interpretations is all about ‘finding
Parliament’s intention’. This impression is also supported by the words of Lord
Simon in Ealing London Borough Council v Race Relations Board (1972) 1
ALL ER, 105, in which he stated that “it is the duty of a court to interpret an Act of
Parliament as to give effect to its intention”. The question that arises is: Is the
process of statutory interpretation aimed at giving effect to the intention of
Parliament as expressed in a particular Act of Parliament?
7
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• While the words of Lord Simon in the Ealing London Borough Council case may
seem to suggest an affirmative answer to the question, other authorities suggest
the contrary. For example, Lord Reid in Black-Clawson International Ltd v
Papiewerke Waldho-Aschaffenburg AG (1975) 1 ALL ER, 810, stated thus: “we
often say that we are looking for the intention of Parliament, but that is not quite
accurate. We are seeking not what Parliament meant but the true meaning of what
they said”. Support for Lord Reid’s point may be found in Hilder v Dexter (1902)
AC, 474, where Lord Halsbury declined to give judgment as to the meaning of the
Companies Act 1900, on the ground that he had drafted the Act. He said:
“I have more than once had occasion to say that in construing a statute, I
believe the worst person to construe it is the person who is responsible for
its drafting. He is very much disposed to confuse what he intended to do
with the effect of the language which in fact has been employed. At the time
he drafted the statute, at all events, he may have been under the impression
that he had given full effect to what he intended, but he may be mistaken in
construing it afterwards just because what was in his mind was what was
intended, though perhaps it was not done. For that reason I abstain from
giving judgment in this case myself”.
7
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• Both intrinsic and extrinsic aids to statutory interpretation are ‘materials’ which the
court may consult in ascertaining the meaning of the word or words used in a
statute.
(a) Intrinsic aids are those that are found within the four corners of a given statute.
They are, in essence, a sum total of the various parts of a statute. These are:
the short title; the long title; the date of assent; the enacting formula; the
sections and subsections; marginal notes; the extent of application; and the
commencement date. In addition, an Act of Parliament will normally have
definition section; savings and repeals section (sometimes known as
transitional provisions); and schedules at the end of the Act. What is important
to note is that not all these are of equal significance as indicators of the meaning
of the statute.
The following is what the courts of law and some commentators have said in
reference to the usefulness of some of the intrinsic aids of statutory
interpretation:
7
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
ii. Short title - The leading case is Re Boaler (1915) 1 KB, 21 in which
it was noted that a short title is part of the Act and as such the court
can and should consider it. However, a short title is, by its very
definition, a short title and therefore, as Scrutton LJ put it,
‘accuracy may be sacrificed to brevity’.
7
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
provisions which state that the defined terms shall ‘include’ whatever
the provision states them to include. In cases falling within the latter
category the words will have not only their special statutory meaning
but, according to Lord Selborne
LC in Robinson v Barton-Eccles Local Board (1883) 8 App.
Cas. 798, they will also posses their ‘ordinary, popular and natural
sense whenever that would be applicable’.
• The following extract from Glanville Williams’ Learning the Law sums up the
significance of extrinsic aids for purposes of statutory interpretation:
“Not all of these [intrinsic aids] are of equal significance as indicators of the
meaning of the statute. There is a good deal of ancient learning about the
matter, but the essential distinction is that some of these features are the
enacting parts of the statutes (which can be considered and amended by
Parliament), whereas others (the cross-headings, the side-notes or
marginal notes and the punctuation) are regarded as being of less
significance since they do not enact anything. It seems likely, however that
a court… would permit some use of them if they shed light on the meaning
of the Act.”
(b) Extrinsic materials, on the other hand, are materials, outside the four corners
of the Act but very often related to the Act in one way or the other, that the court
may make use of in ascertaining the meaning of the words used in the statute.
7
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
It must be noted, however, that the extent to which courts may make use of
these types of extrinsic materials is still a subject of debate. But there is a
plethora of authorities suggesting that courts may seek some guidance from
these matters in deserving cases.
It is also worth noting that section 2(1) of the Interpretation and General
Provisions Act makes it very clear that the provisions of the Act apply to every
written law passed or made before or after the commencement of the Act, unless a
contrary intention appears in the Act or in the written law concerned.
While it is important for students to familiarize themselves with all the provisions
of the Interpretation and General Provisions Act, Students are particularly
urged to ensure that they take time to acquaint themselves with provisions in
Parts II, III, IV, V, VII and VIII of the Act.
7
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
UNIT 6
JUDICIAL PRECEDENT
6.1 Introduction
7
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
7
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
When faced with a case on which there appears to be a relevant earlier decision,
the judges can do any of the following:
7 Follow - If the facts are sufficiently similar, the precedent set by the earlier
case is followed, and the law applied in the same way to produce a decision.
8
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
8 Distinguish - Where the facts of the case before the judge are significantly
different from those of the earlier one, then the judge distinguishes the two
cases and need not follow the earlier one.
9 Overrule - Where the earlier decision was made in a lower court, the judges
can overrule that earlier decision if they disagree with the lower court’s
statement of the law. The outcome of the earlier decision remains the same,
but will not be followed. The power to overrule cases is only used sparingly
because it weakens the authority and respect of the lower courts.
10 Reverse - If the decision of a lower court is appealed to a higher one, the higher
court may change it if they feel the lower court has wrongly interpreted the
law. Clearly when a decision is reversed, the higher court is usually also
overruling the lower court’s statement of the law.
Distinguishing
The court may refuse to follow a previous decision on the ground that the material facts
in the previous decision are not the same as the material facts in the case before court.
Whenever the court comes to such conclusion, the case on which the court is required to
pronounce itself is said to be distinguishable from the previous decision.
Distinguishing a case on its facts, or on the point of law involved, is a device used by
judges usually in order to avoid the consequences of an earlier inconvenient decision
which is, in practice, binding on them. Thus, distinguishing an earlier case from a later
case is simply a way of saying that the earlier case is irrelevant to the later case and
cannot, therefore, be followed as precedent. Put differently, the practical implication of
distinguishing an earlier case from a later case is that the earlier case is rendered
8
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
inapplicable to the later case. It does not, however, imply criticism of the correctness of
the earlier case. Neither does it imply that the earlier case cannot be followed in future
cases founded on similar facts.
Overruling
Overruling simply means declaring a previous decision as having been wrongly decided.
This happens when a higher court reaches the conclusion that a decision made in an
earlier case by a lower court was based on the wrong application of the law or that the
ratio decidendi of such decision is no longer desirable. An example of a decision overruled
on the ground that it was based on the wrong application of the law is Anderton v Ryan
(1985) 2 ALL ER 335 which was overruled by the House of Lords in R v Shivpuri (1986)
2 ALL ER 334 in relation to the Criminal Attempts Act, 1981 while Miliangos v George
Frank Ltd (1975) 3 ALL ER 801 is an example of a decision that overruled previous
authorities on the ground that the it was a decision which was no longer desirable.[ The
previous authorities had decided that judgments could not be given in a foreign currency].
In Zambia, the power to overrule a previous decision lies only with the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court can overrule previous decisions of the High Court as well as overrule
its own previous decisions. But the High Court cannot overrule its own previous decisions
although it may disapprove such decisions.
The practical implication of overruling a previous decision is that such decision loses all
its authority and ceases to be precedent forthwith in relation to all future cases.
Reversing
Reversing is the overturning on appeal, by a higher court hearing the appeal, of the
decision of the lower court. The appellate court, on reversing the decision of a lower court,
substitutes its own decision. For example, where a party to a case decided by the High
Court is dissatisfied with the decision of the High Court and appeals to the Supreme Court
8
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
and the Supreme Court allows the appeal by reaching at a different decision from that of
the High Court, the decision of the High Court stands reversed.
In practice, a decision that has been reversed has no authority as precedent and cannot,
therefore, be followed in any future case founded on similar facts. Neither is it binding on
the parties to it.
Dissenting
To ‘dissent’ is to ‘disagree’ or to hold a ‘different’ opinion. The term dissenting is used in
relation to any judgement of a judge or judges who reach a different decision from the
majority of the judges hearing a case. This happens when a case is heard by a panel of
three (03) or any other odd number of judges and the minority of judges on the panel
disagrees with the conclusion reached by the majority of the judges on the panel. In such
circumstances, the decision of the minority judges on the panel is known as a ‘dissenting’
judgment while that of the majority of judges on the panel is known as the
‘majority’ judgment. The ‘majority’ judgement is the one that is binding and that may be
followed in future as precedent, not the ‘dissenting’ or ‘minority’ judgement.
It is important to note that ‘dissenting’ judgments are presently not a feature of the
Zambian legal system, at least in practice. This is because although our judges are, in
theory, entitled to reach different conclusions in any case that is being heard by a panel
of judges, we do not see any dissenting judgments being delivered. This state of affairs
might be attributed to the lack of resources, human and time, to accommodate the luxury
of a judge sitting to put his/her disagreements with colleagues in a separate judgment.
As already stated above, judicial precedent or case law comes from the decisions
made by judges in the cases before them (the decisions of juries do not make case
law). In deciding a case, there are two basic tasks: first, establishing what the facts
are, meaning what actually happened; and secondly, how the law applies to those
8
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
facts. It is the second task that can make case law, and the idea is that once a
decision has been made on how the law applies to a particular set of facts, similar
facts in later cases should be treated in the same way, following the principle of
stare decisis described above. This is obviously fairer than allowing each judge to
interpret the law differently and also provides predictability, which makes it easier
for people to live within the law.
The judges listen to the evidence and the legal argument and then prepare a written
decision as to which party wins, based on what they believe the facts were, and
how the law applies to them. This decision is known as the judgment, and is usually
long, containing quite a lot of comment which is not strictly relevant to the case, as
well as an explanation of the legal principles on which the judge has made a
decision.
The explanation of the legal principles on which the decision is made is called the
ratio decidendi – Latin for the ‘reason for deciding’. It is this part of the judgment,
known as binding precedent, which forms case law.
All the parts of the judgment which do not form part of the ratio decidendi of the
case are called obiter dicta – which are Latin for ‘things said by the way’. These are
often discussions of hypothetical situations: for example, the judge might say ‘Jones
did this, but if she had done that, my decision would have been . . .’. None of the
obiter dicta forms part of the case law, though judges in later cases may be
influenced by it, and it is said to be a persuasive precedent.
In deciding a case, a judge must follow any decision that has been made by a higher
court in a case with similar facts. The rules concerning which courts are bound by
which are known as the rules of judicial precedent, or stare decisis. As well as being
bound by the decisions of courts above them, some courts must also follow their
own previous decisions; they are said to be bound by themselves.
8
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Zambia, as explained in UNIT 3, is a dual legal system comprising the ‘received’ English
law and the local customary law. The doctrine of precedent is part of the common law
tradition inherited from the ‘received’ English law. In order to facilitate access to previous
judicial decisions in Zambia, the Council of Law Reporting publishes the Zambia Law
Reports which are available for sale to lawyers and interested members of the public.
When an issue arises on which there are no Zambian previous decisions, English
previous decisions relevant to the issue may be used. However, English cases are not
binding on Zambian courts: they are merely persuasive. So are the decisions from other
common law jurisdictions.
It is also important to note that the use of judicial precedent is governed by the hierarchical
nature of the court system which makes the decisions of higher courts binding on the
lower courts. Thus, the decisions of the Supreme Court are binding on all the courts lower
than the Supreme Court in the judicial hierarchy. But the Supreme Court is also bound by
its own previous decisions subject to its jurisdiction to overrule itself, as will be explained
later. In the same way, decisions of the High Court bind all the courts that are below the
High Court in the judicial hierarchy. But unlike the Supreme Court, the High Court cannot
overrule itself: it can merely disapprove itself. Of course, when a High Court Judge
disapproves the decision of another High Court Judge, this creates a problem as to which
of the two decisions is binding on the lower courts since High Court Judges enjoy the
same level of jurisdiction and are not, save for reasons of certainty and consistency in the
law, bound by the decisions of each other. Whenever such a situation arises, the latest
of the two conflicting decisions is the one binding on the lower courts.
Decisions of lower courts do not bind anyone other than the parties to it if they choose
not to appeal to the higher courts. The ratio decidendi of a case
8
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
ratio decidendi is also defined as “the material facts of a case plus the decision thereon”,
there is no universal agreement on this definition.
A general formula for determining the ratio decidendi of a case has been suggested in
the following ways:
“Suppose that in a certain case facts A, B and C exist and suppose that the court
finds that facts B and C are material and fact A immaterial, and then reaches
conclusion X (for example judgement for the Claimant, or judgement for the
defendant), then the doctrine of precedent enables us to say that in any future case
in which facts B and C exist, or in which facts A, B and C exist, the conclusion must
be X. If in any future case facts A, B, C and D exist and fact D is held to be material,
the first case will not be direct authority, though it may be of value as an analogy”.
What facts are legally material? That depends on the particular case but take as
an illustration a “running down” action, that is to say an action for injuries sustained
through the defendant’s negligent driving of a vehicle. The fact that the Claimant
had red hair and freckles, that her name was Smith, and that the accident
happened on a Friday are immaterial, for the rule of law upon which the decision
proceeds will apply equally to persons who do not possess these characteristics
and to accidents that happen on other days. On the other hand, the fact that the
defendant drove negligently, and the fact that in consequence the Claimant was
injured, are material, and a decision in the Claimant’s favour on such facts will be
an authority for the proposition that a person is liable for causing damage through
the negligent driving of a vehicle”. [Glanville William’s Learning the Law, p 93]
It is clear from the foregoing extract that the importance of the materiality of the facts
cannot be discounted when it comes to ascertaining the ratio decidendi of a particular
case. But who decides which facts are material – the earlier judge or the later one? To
fully appreciate the answer to this question, one needs to recognise that the concept of
8
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
ratio decidendi is capable of being used in two distinct ways: descriptively and
prescriptively.
In its descriptive sense, the phrase ratio decidendi is used to describe the way in which
the earlier judge reached the decision. In this context, a later judge must acknowledge
the materiality of the facts which the earlier judge treated as being material.
On the other hand, the phrase ratio decidendi when used in its prescriptive sense refers
to the statement of law derived from the earlier case which that case prescribes as being
the law for later courts to follow. The distinction between the two has been aptly explained
by one commentator in the following terms:
“Should we not….try scrupulously to respect the distinction between that use of
the term ratio decidendi which describes the process of reasoning by which a
decision was reached (the ‘descriptive’ ratio decidendi), and that which identifies
and delimits the reasoning which a later court is bound to follow (the ‘prescriptive’
or binding ratio decidendi)? [See Ian McLeod’s Legal method, p 150]
It is important to note that it is not uncommon for a judge to base his or her decision on
more than one line of reasoning. In other words, a judge might advance more than one
reason for his or her decision. In such circumstances, there are as many ratios as the
reasons advanced by the judge and all of them are binding on a later judge: the later
judge cannot pick and choose between or among the reasons.
8
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
It is important to note that although obiter dictum is not binding, it does not follow that it is
worthless in terms of the doctrine of precedent: dicta may, in practice, be so persuasive
that a judge may feel compelled to follow it. In this regard, a distinction must be made
between gratis dicta and judicial dicta. The former are mere throwaways (sayings which
are given away, as it were, free) and so of very little, if any, value or persuasive force.
They are considered as not having been given much thought by the judge before saying
them. Judicial dicta, on the other hand, are preceded not only by a great deal of careful
thought, but also by extensive argument on the point in question. It is this careful thought
and extensive argument that makes judicial dicta so strongly persuasive as to be
practically indistinguishable from ratio decidendi.
i. Advantages
(a) Precedent ensures certainty and, therefore, predictability in the law. This is
because by looking at an existing precedent, it is possible to forecast what
a decision will be and plan accordingly;
8
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(b) Precedent ensures uniformity in the law. Treating similar cases in the same
way gives the system a sense of justice and makes the system acceptable
to the public.
(c) The doctrine of judicial precedent is flexible in the sense that there are a
number of ways in which its application can be avoided. This enables the
system to change and adapt to new situations.
(d) Judicial precedent is practical in nature. Unlike legislation, it is based on real
facts.
(e) Judicial precedent is detailed in the sense that there is a wealth of cases to
refer to.
ii. Disadvantages
(a) Rigidity. Although precedent is flexible, it can, at the same time, be rigid. If
a previous decision made by a higher court is cited before a lower court in
a later case, the lower court has no option but to apply such previous
decision regardless of its merits because a lower court has no power to
question the merits of a previous decision made by a higher court. This, in
practice, may result in injustice to parties involved in the later case.
(b) There is far too much case law which is also sometimes very complex;
(c) Difficulties can arise in deciding what the ratio decidendi of a case is,
particularly in cases where there are several reasons advanced for the
decision.
(d) There may be a considerable wait for case to come to court for a point to
be decided.
In Paton v Attorney General and Others, (1968) Z.R.185, Doyle, J.A., as he then
was, had this to say, at p. 190:
“Mr. Ryan, for the defendant cross-appellant, first argued that Thixton’s case
was wrongly decided. He submitted that this court was not bound by its
previous decisions. The United States Supreme Court, the Supreme Court of
the Republic of Ireland, the ultimate courts of Cananda, Australia, South
8
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Africa and most European countries hold themselves free, if they think it right
to do so, to refuse to follow a previous decision. Recently, the House of Lords
in England has abandoned its rigid adherence to the rule of stare decisis. I
have no doubt that this court as the ultimate Court of Appeal for Zambia is
not absolutely bound by its previous decisions. It can, however, only be for
very compelling reasons that the court would refuse to follow a decision of
the court and only where the court clearly considered that the previous
decision was wrong. The relaxation of the rule is not its abandonment and
ordinarily the rule of stare decisis should be followed. Abandonment of the
rule would make the law an abyss of uncertainty. Mr. Ryan urged that it was
open to this court to refuse to follow a previous decision which was not
unanimous. That, in my view, is not a compelling reason. Thixton’s case was
fully argued and it has certainly not been shown that it was clearly wrong.
Indeed I, as the dissenting Judge in that case, recognised and recognise that
the result which flowed from the majority decision was more in accord with
natural justice than that which flowed from the view of the law which I felt
compelled to take. This point therefore fails.”
The Supreme Court expressed similar sentiments in Kasote v The People (1977)
Z.R. 75:
“The Supreme Court being the final court in Zambia adopts the practice of the
House of Lords in England concerning previous decisions of its own and will
decide first whether in its view the previous case was wrongly decided and
secondly if so whether there is a sufficiently good reason to decline to follow
it. We have already pointed out that Chibozu was wrongly decided and the
next question for us to consider is whether there is sufficiently strong reason
for us to decline to follow the decision in that case, it is our considered view
that justice was not served in Chibozu because the symbolic scales of justice
mean that just as an accused person should not be convicted unless there is
sufficient and cogent evidence proving his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the
State also should not be made to lose a case unless the evidence it adduces
cannot, in law, support a conviction; that way the scales are balanced. On
this basis we come to the conclusion that sufficiently strong reason does exit
9
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
And in Abel Banda v The People (1986) Z.R. 105, the Supreme Court had this to say:
“The problem before us therefore is that we have made case law which we
have now realised is indefensible. The principle of stare decisis requires that
a court should abide by its ratio decidendi in past cases. Put simplistically in
order to have certainty in the law decisions of courts should be consistent and
should not be so readily changeable as to make it at any given time what the
law is on a given issue. In order to uphold this principle therefore past
decisions should not be exploded for the sole reason that they are wrong.
Courts should stand by their decisions even if they are erroneous unless there
is a sufficiently strong reason requiring that such decisions should be
overruled”.
From the above cited cases, it is clear that the Supreme Court of Zambia regards
itself as bound by its previous decisions. At the same time, however, the Supreme
Court has power to depart from its previous decision if the previous decision is
‘indefensible’. The following are some of the circumstances that can justify the
Supreme Court’s decision to refuse to follow its previous decision:
i. When the previous decision has been overruled; ii. When it comes
to the attention of the court that the previous decision was made per
incuriam (the per incuriam doctrine); and
iii. When it comes to the attention of the court that the circumstances
in which the previous decision was made have since changed
(the changed circumstance doctrine).
9
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
In an earlier case of Duke v Reliance Systems Ltd (1987) 2 ALL ER, 858, Sir John
Donaldson MR stated that he had
“…always understood that the doctrine of per incuriam only applies where [a
court] has reached a decision in the absence of knowledge of a decision
binding on it or a statute, and that in either case it has to be shown that had
the court had this material, it must have reached a contrary decision….”.
PRESUMPTIONS
Introduction
9
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
reason, the courts apply the rule that when Parliament has conferred
a judicial or quasi-judicial power upon a person, that power must be
exercised in accordance with the rules of natural justice.
When Parliament creates a new crime, this is presumed to be subject
to certain defences at common law such as self-defence and duress,
and also (very frequently) to the requirement of the state of the mind
(intention, knowledge or recklessness). These are judge-made
principles required by our ideas of justice and grafted on the statute by
‘implication’ although there may be no words in the statute to suggest
them”.
Definition
Types of Presumptions
iv. Rebuttable presumptions of law – These are inferences which the law
requires to be drawn from given facts and which are conclusive until
disproved by evidence to the contrary. Examples include the
presumption of innocence of an accused person; the presumption of
death of a person who has not been heard of for 7 years; the
presumption of legitimacy for children born in wedlock; and the
presumption of marriage.
v. Irrebuttable presumptions of law – These are absolute inferences
established by law. Evidence is not admissible to contradict them: they
are rules of law. Irrebuttable presumptions of law are also sometimes
9
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
9
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
“The purpose of the Act was manifestly to saddle the employer with
liability for defective plant of every sort with which the employee is
compelled to work in the course of his employment, and I can see no
ground for excluding particular types of chattel merely on the ground
of their size or the element on which they are designed to operate”.
The position is different in the United Kingdom (UK). It would appear that
the distinction between matters of procedure and matters of substance
has since disappeared. The new approach for the application of the
presumption appears to be that the issue should not be whether the
matters involved are procedural or substantial but rather whether the
retrospective application of the law would be unfair in the circumstances
9
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
of each individual case. Read Yew Bon Tew v Kenderaan Bas Mara (1982)
3 ALL ER, 833; Re A Solicitor’s Clerk (1957) 3 ALL ER, 617; Secretary of
State for Social Services v Tunnicliffe (1991) 2 ALL ER, 712; and L’Office
Cherifien des Phosphates and another v Yamashita Steamship Co. Ltd:
The Boucraa (1994) 1 ALL ER, 20.
When such a problem arises, the courts will normally presume that
Parliament expected mens rea to be a precondition of guilt and
accordingly they will refuse to convict in its absence. However, this is a
rebuttable presumption meaning that if evidence is adduced to prove the
contrary, the accused may be convicted.
“Those who contend that a penalty may be inflicted must show that
the words of the Act distinctly enact that it shall be incurred under the
present circumstances. They must fail if the words are merely equally
capable of a construction that would, and one that would not, inflict
the penalty’.
9
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
As already noted above, presumptions are many and cannot all be covered
here. But students may wish to also familarialise themselves with the
presumption against gaining advantage from wrong doing; the presumption
relating to consolidating and codifying statutes; and the presumption
relating to ‘and’ and ‘or’, among others.
• Looking at UNIT 5.10 of the course outline for this course, one gets the
impression that the process of statutory interpretations is all about ‘finding
Parliament’s intention’. This impression is also supported by the words of
Lord Simon in Ealing London Borough Council v Race Relations Board (1972)
1 ALL ER, 105, in which he stated that “it is the duty of a court to interpret an
Act of Parliament as to give effect to its intention”. The question that arises
is: Is the process of statutory interpretation aimed at giving effect to the
intention of Parliament as expressed in a particular Act of Parliament?
• While the words of Lord Simon in the Ealing London Borough Council case
may seem to suggest an affirmative answer to the question, other authorities
suggest the contrary. For example, Lord Reid in Black-Clawson International
Ltd v Papiewerke Waldho-Aschaffenburg AG (1975) 1 ALL ER, 810, stated
thus: “we often say that we are looking for the intention of Parliament, but
that is not quite accurate. We are seeking not what Parliament meant but
the true meaning of what they said”. Support for Lord Reid’s point may be
found in Hilder v Dexter (1902) AC, 474, where Lord Halsbury declined to
give judgment as to the meaning of the Companies Act 1900, on the ground
that he had drafted the Act. He said:
9
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• Intrinsic aids are those that are found within the four corners of a given
statute. They are, in essence, a sum total of the various parts of a statute.
These are: the short title; the long title; the date of assent; the enacting
formula; the sections and subsections; marginal notes; the extent of
application; and the commencement date. In addition, an Act of Parliament
will normally have definition section; savings and repeals section (sometimes
known as transitional provisions); and schedules at the end of the Act. What
is important to note is that not all these are of equal significance as indicators
of the meaning of the statute.
9
8
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• The following is what the courts of law and some commentators have said in
reference to the usefulness of some of the intrinsic aids of statutory
interpretation:
j. Long title - According to Lord Lane CJ, in R v Galvin (1987) 2 ALL ER,
851: “One can have regard to the title of a statute to help resolve
an ambiguity in the body of it, but it is not, we consider, open to a
court to use the title to restrict what is otherwise the plain meaning
of the words of the statute simply because they seem to be unduly
wide”.
ii. Short title - The leading case is Re Boaler (1915) 1 KB, 21 in which it
was noted that a short title is part of the Act and as such the court can
and should consider it. However, a short title is, by its very definition,
a short title and therefore, as Scrutton LJ put it, ‘accuracy may be
sacrificed to brevity’.
9
9
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• The following extract from Glanville Williams’ Learning the Law sums up the
significance of extrinsic aids for purposes of statutory interpretation:
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
• On the other hand, extrinsic materials are materials, outside the four
corners of the Act but very often related to the Act in one way or the other,
that the court may make use of in ascertaining the meaning of the words
used in the statute.
• It must be noted, however, that the extent to which courts may make use of
these types of extrinsic materials is still a subject of debate. But there is a
plethora of authorities suggesting that courts may seek some guidance from
these matters in deserving cases.
• The Interpretation and General Provisions Act, Cap 2 of the Laws of Zambia
is perhaps the most useful intrinsic material for statutory interpretation
purposes. The importance of this piece of legislation, so far as the
interpretation of statutes is concerned, cannot be over emphasized and is
apparent from the long title of the Act: “An Act to amend and consolidate
the law relating to the construction, application and interpretation of
written law; to provide for the exercise of statutory powers and duties; and
to provide for matters incidental to or connected with the foregoing”.
• It is also worth noting that section 2(1) of the Interpretation and General
Provisions Act makes it very clear that the provisions of the Act apply to
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
every written law passed or made before or after the commencement of the
Act, unless a contrary intention appears in the Act or in the written law
concerned. Students are, therefore, well advised to.
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Zambia’s present legal system is the product of a history that includes two distinct
legal traditions. In the pre-colonial period, each of the many ethnic groups in the
territory of modern Zambia resolved disputes in accordance with its own customs.
Common features of these customary systems included a desire for prompt
resolution of differences, informal procedures, a conciliatory approach that
emphasized continuing social relationships, and a concern for avoiding lasting
enmity and preserving harmony, order, and security within the community. The
British colonists who arrived in the late 19th century brought with them their own
laws and procedures. They introduced English common law and established British-
style courts and related institutions to administer justice.
Giving effect to English common law for the European population was a substantial
challenge for colonial administrators. The authorities were content to allow tribal
courts applying customary law to continue to administer justice for the African
population. Early Orders in Council authorizing the appointment of judges to apply
English law also called for respect for “native laws or customs,” except where found
incompatible with the exercise of British sovereignty.
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
22
law in cases where Africans were among the parties “if not repugnant to justice and
morality or inconsistent with any enactment [of British law or colonial ordinance].”
At the same time, the vast majority of litigation involving Africans continued to be
dealt with under customary law in the traditional courts that had existed prior to
the arrival of the colonists. The subject matters addressed often involved the
possession and transfer of land and other property, inheritance, marriage, divorce,
and personal status. The traditional courts also dealt with offenses under
customary law, deciding on punishment and on duties of restoration and
reconciliation.
The colonial administration gave enhanced official status to the so-called “native
courts” in 1929 and, at the same time, began to exercise increased control over
them. The 1929 Native Courts Ordinance authorized magistrates’ courts to review
and revise native court decisions. Regulation of traditional courts was consolidated
in the Native Courts Ordinance of 1936, regarded as the predecessor of the post-
independence Local Courts Act of 1966. The formalization of the status of these
courts was motivated, in part, by the establishment of native courts, beginning in
the 1920s and 1930s, in urban areas populated by individuals of diverse ethnicity
from various parts of Zambia. Increasing urbanization and mobility necessarily
complicated the application of a customary law system that had originated and
operated in the context of stable, homogenous village communities.
The administration of justice was the theme of a series of African conferences that
were organized in the 1950s and 1960s as the colonial era was coming to an end.
These conferences produced broad agreement on four principal goals: - A
professional magistracy, to provide safeguards against abuses of judicial power;
- Specialized courts, to improve quality and efficiency;
- Separation of powers, to diminish risks of executive influence on judicial
decisions; and
- Unification of national legal systems, to encourage equal justice based on a
single body of law and a single justice system.
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The duality of Zambian law – as applied by the local courts, on the one hand, and
by all other Zambian courts, on the other – is gradually being eroded. The
subordinate courts apply customary law when hearing appeals from local court
decisions. For their part, local courts are obliged not to follow customary law when
doing so would be “incompatible with the provisions of any law.” For example, the
Zambian law on intestate succession guarantees property rights of widows in the
estates of their late husbands, whereas under customary law the estate of a
married man normally went to his family (parents, siblings, and their progeny)
rather than to the widow. In addition, local courts can be authorized “to administer
all or any of the provisions of any written law.” The Zambian Law Development
Commission, a statutory body that prepares government-sponsored legislation, is
working with the Director of Local Courts to develop a law to harmonize the
customary law to be applied by local courts throughout Zambia. This initiative is
intended to contribute to more equal treatment in the local courts of similarly
situated persons. In some isolated regions, disputes continue to be resolved under
customary law by traditional chiefs’ courts outside the statutory framework of the
local courts and without regard to written law, even though the resulting decisions
have no legal standing.
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Under Part VI of the Constitution and the Judicature Administration Act, the
Judiciary is an autonomous institution. The Judiciary is headed by the Chief Justice.
Article 91 of the Constitution declares that judicial officers shall be independent,
impartial, and subject only to the Constitution and the law. Under the Judicial Code
of Conduct Act of 1999, the ethical conduct of adjudicators is regulated under the
supervision of the Judicial Complaints Authority. Judicial officers are expected to be
above family, personal, private, political, and other interests, and above public
clamor or criticism.
Prior to 1994, the MOJ, at that time the Ministry of Legal Affairs, was responsible
for the court administration functions now performed by the Chief Administrator.
Also, prior to 2007, many of the functions of the Judicial Service Commission to
employ and oversee judicial staff were carried out by the Public Service
Commission. The present structure represents a major improvement in the
administrative autonomy of the judiciary.
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Local court and subordinate court magistrates are appointed by the Judicial Service
Commission to permanent positions and must retire at the age of 55, after which
they may be re-appointed on contract by the Commission. A proposal to
23
Financing for the Judiciary comes from funds appropriated by Parliament, as well
as court fees. The Judiciary retains 100 percent of its fees, with 40 percent retained
in the districts where they are collected (stations) and 60 percent remitted to
headquarters. Monies raised from court fines may not be retained and are remitted
to the Central Treasury. Salaries of Supreme Court and High Court judges are drawn
directly from the Treasury in accordance with the Constitutional Emoluments Act
whereas emoluments of subordinate and local court magistrates and judicial staff
are met through Judiciary appropriations. The Judiciary makes its own budget
within the confines of a ceiling set by the Minister of Finance. Although the
Government retains ultimate responsibility for infrastructure development, the
Judiciary budget includes some infrastructure development and donors may
directly support additional capital projects and programs. The accounts are subject
to audit by the Auditor-General and the Judiciary must submit an annual report to
Parliament.
The court structure may be likened to a pyramid with the higher levels of courts
exercising supervisory powers over the lower levels. At the bottom of the pyramid
lie 470 local courts, staffed by local court magistrates and applying customary law.
Decisions of the local courts may be appealed to the subordinate courts, which hear
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
those appeals de novo. There are subordinate courts in 54 districts throughout the
country. Most of the subordinate court magistrates are not members of the bar (lay
magistrates). Increasingly, professional magistrates (lawyers) are found presiding
over the subordinate courts located in major cities. Appeals from the subordinate
courts lie to the High Court, which conducts proceedings in all the provincial
capitals. Of equal rank to the High Court is the
Industrial Relations Court, a specialized tribunal that hears labor disputes. At the
top of the hierarchy is the Supreme Court, which hears appeals from the High Court
and the Industrial Relations Court. Although based in Lusaka, the Supreme Court
regularly sits also in Ndola and Kabwe.
Customary law matters must be commenced in the local courts. The local courts
administer customary law in any matter insofar as such law is not repugnant to
natural justice or morality or incompatible with the provisions of any written law.
They may adjudicate customary law offenses equivalent to statutory offenses and
municipal offenses to the same extent. Also, the Local Courts Act permits local
courts to try criminal and municipal cases when so authorized by the magistrate in
charge. Local courts are not formally courts of record, although some of them
create summary records of their proceedings.
The subordinate courts are first instance courts of record, following relatively
simple procedures. They handle both civil and criminal cases within their territorial
jurisdiction. The Subordinate Courts Act limits the size of civil claims, the types of
offenses, and the penalties that these courts can impose. In addition, different
classes of magistrate handle matters within certain statutory bands. Matters within
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
the subordinate court’s jurisdiction must be commenced there rather than in the
High Court.
The High Court has original and appellate jurisdiction in both civil and criminal
matters. Constitutional matters, civil marriage divorce, and capital offenses such as
murder and treason all commence in the High Court, which has very rigid
procedures. The High Court has a commercial division with special judge-driven
procedures to speed up litigation. The Industrial Relations Court has less rigid
procedures and focuses on delivering substantive justice in labor matters. The
Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over both civil and criminal appeals from
the High Court and the Industrial Relations Court as well as appeals from the
Lands Tribunal. It has original jurisdiction only in the matter of a presidential
election petition. There is no restriction on the right of appeal through the court
hierarchy from the local court to the Supreme Court. However, the costs of
litigation rise substantially as a case proceeds up the appellate ladder.
Pro se appearances by litigants in the higher courts are extremely difficult because
of the rigid adherence to procedure as a prerequisite to the hearing of substantive
issues. The appellate court does not hear the matter de novo or call witnesses, and
rarely reviews the lower court’s findings of fact. Rather the appeal focuses on
determining matters of law as presented in the court record. Enforcement of
judgments is the responsibility of the Sheriff, who is appointed by the Judicial
Service Commission, and bailiffs also appointed by the Commission.
The volume of litigation and the workload of the courts are not fully discernable
from the available data. The Registrar’s Office was able to provide information on
the number of cases filed and the number of cases disposed of by the Supreme
Court, High Court, Industrial Relations Court, and Subordinate Courts. However,
data were not available on the backlog of cases that will determine to a great extent
when the courts will be able to take up the newly filed cases. No specific
information was available about the volume of work of the local courts. However,
one knowledgeable source estimates that the local courts dispose of 90 percent of
1
0
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
the adjudications in Zambia. The available data on cases filed and disposed of in
2008 are set out in Table IV-3 below.
The legal basis of Zambia’s present court system is Article 91 of the republican
Constitution. It provides as follows:
91(1) The Judicature of the Republic consists of: i. the Supreme Court
of Zambia; ii. the High Court for Zambia; iii. the Industrial
Relations Court; iv. the Subordinate Courts; v. the Local
Courts; and vi. such lower Courts as may be prescribed by an Act
of Parliament.
(2) The Judges, Members, Magistrates and Justices, as the case may be of
the courts mentioned in clause (1) shall be independent, impartial and
subject only to this Constitution and the law and shall conduct
themselves in accordance with a code of conduct promulgated by
Parliament.
It is worth noting that pursuant to Article 91(1) (e) above, we have the Small Claims
Courts Act, Cap 47 of the laws of Zambia which establishes the Small Claims Courts.
The Small Claims Courts are still being run on a pilot basis in Lusaka and Ndola.
In addition to the formal Court structure mentioned above, chiefs are permitted to
hold their own hearings in what may loosely be termed as ‘traditional courts’ but
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
these are not formally recognised as Courts. A matter heard by the chief’s Court
must be heard de novo if it is taken to the Local Court.
It must also be mentioned that other specialized adjudicating fora exists. These
include the Lands Tribunal; the Revenue Appeals Tribunal; the Town and Country
Planning Tribunal; and Military Courts (or Court Marshals)
i. Constitutional provisions
(3) The office of Chief Justice, Deputy Chief Justice or of Supreme Court
Judge shall not be abolished while there is a substantive holder
thereof.
(4) The Supreme Court shall be a superior court of record, and, except as
otherwise provided by Parliament, shall have all the powers of such a
Court.
(5) When the Supreme Court is determining any matter, other than an
interlocutory matter, it shall be composed of an uneven number of
Judges not being less than three except as provided for under Article
41.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(6) The Chief Justice may make rules with respect to the practice and
procedure of the Supreme Court in relation to jurisdiction and powers
of the Supreme Court.
93(1) The Chief Justice and the Deputy Chief Justice shall, subject to
ratification by the National Assembly, be appointed by the
President.
(2) The Judges of the Supreme Court shall, subject to ratification by the
National Assembly, be appointed by the President.
ii. The Supreme Court of Zambia Act – CAP 25 of the laws of Zambia
This is an Act to provide for the constitution, jurisdiction and procedure of the
Supreme Court of Zambia; to prescribe the powers of the Court; and to provide for
matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. It supplements constitutional
provisions on the jurisdiction and other matters related to the Supreme Court.
(2) The determination of any question before the Court shall be according to the
opinion of the majority of the members of the Court hearing the case.
4. A single Judge of the Court may exercise any power vested in the Court not
involving the decision of an appeal or a final decision in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction but –
(a) in criminal matters if any Judge of the Court refuses an application
for the exercise of any such power, the person making the
application shall be entitled to have his application determined by
the Court; and
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
5. A Judge of the Court shall not sit on the hearing of an appeal, nor shall he
exercise any power under section four in respect of an appeal-
(a) from any judgment given by himself or any judgment given by
any Court of which he was sitting as a member;
(b) against a conviction or sentence if he was the Judge by or before
whom the appellant was convicted. Judge not to sit on appeal
from his own decision
7. The Court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals in civil and
criminal matters as provided in this Act and such other appellate or original
jurisdiction as may be conferred upon it by or under the Constitution or any
other law.
8. The jurisdiction vested in the Court shall, as regards practice and procedure,
be exercised in the manner provided by this Act and rules of Court: Provided
that if this Act or rules of Court do not make provision for any particular point
of practice and procedure of the Court shall be –
9. The process of the Court shall run throughout Zambia and any Judgment of
the Court shall be executed and enforced in like manner as if it were a
Judgment of the High Court.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
10(1) The sittings of the Court shall usually be held at Lusaka or Ndola but may be
held at such other place as the Chief Justice may direct.
(2) The dates of sittings of the Court shall be determined by the Chief Justice
(3) The times of sittings of the Court shall be determined by the Chief Justice or,
if he is not a member of the Court hearing a case, the next senior Judge of
the Court hearing the case.
(4) At any sitting, the Court shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, be
composed of such members as the Chief Justice may direct.
11. In all proceedings before the Court the parties may appear in person or be
represented and appear by practitioner.
NOTE: The Supreme Court mainly exercises appellate jurisdiction. However, it has
original jurisdiction in presidential election petitions. Article 41 of the
Constitution makes it mandatory that whenever the Supreme Court is
sitting to hear and determine a presidential election petition, the Court
has to sit as a ‘full bench’ i.e. the maximum number of Supreme Court
Judges available at any given time.
The High Court for Zambia – Judges and jurisdiction of the court
i. Constitutional Provisions
94(1) There shall be a High Court for the Republic which shall have, except as to
the proceedings in which the Industrial Relations Court has exclusive
jurisdiction under the Industrial and Labour Relations Act, unlimited
and original jurisdiction to hear and determine any civil or criminal
proceedings under any law and such jurisdiction and powers as may
be conferred on it by this Constitution or any other law.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) The High Court shall be divided into such divisions as may be determined by
an Act of Parliament.
(3) The Chief Justice shall be an ex-officio Judge of the High Court.
(4) The other Judges of the High Court shall be such number of puisne judges as
may be prescribed by an Act of Parliament.
(5) The office of a puisne judge shall not be abolished while there is a
substantive holder thereof.
(6) The High Court shall be a superior court of record and, except as otherwise
provided by Parliament, shall have the powers of such a court.
(7) The High Court shall have jurisdiction to supervise any civil or criminal
proceedings before any subordinate court or any court- martial and may
make such orders, issue such writs and give such directions as it may consider
appropriate for the purpose of ensuring that justice is duly administered by
any such court.
(8) The Chief Justice may make rules with respect to the practice and procedure
of the High Court in relation to the jurisdiction and power conferred on it by
clause (7).
The phrase ‘unlimited jurisdiction’ in Article 94 (1) of the Constitution does not
imply that the High Court can do anything it pleases in the name of having unlimited
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
jurisdiction. In the case of Zambia National Holdings & UNIP v The Attorney
General (1994/1995) ZR, the Supreme Court held that “although Article 94 of the
Constitution gives the High Court unlimited jurisdiction that Court is bound by all
the laws which govern the exercise of such jurisdiction”.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) Where a trial is held with the aid of assessors under this section, all the
provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code relating to assessors shall,
so far as the same are applicable and subject to any rules of court,
apply to such trial.
(2) The jurisdiction vested in the Court shall include the judicial hearing and
determination of matters in difference, the administration or control
of property or persons, and the power to appoint or control guardians
of infants and their estates, and also keepers of the persons and
estates of idiots, lunatics and such as, being of unsound mind, are
unable to govern themselves and their estates.
11 (1) The jurisdiction of the Court in divorce and matrimonial causes and
matters shall, subject to this Act and any rules of Court, be exercised
in substantial conformity with the law and practice for the time being
in force in England.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) The law and practice for the time being in force for the Probate,
Divorce and Admiralty Divisions of the High Court of Justice in
England with respect to the Queen’s Proctor shall, subject to
rules of Court and to any rules made under the provisions of the
Colonial and Other Territories (Divorce Jurisdiction) Acts, 1926 to
1950, of the United Kingdom, apply to the Attorney-General.
(3) The jurisdiction of the Court in probate causes and matters shall,
subject to this Act and any rules of court, be exercised in
substantial conformity with the law and practice in force in
England on the 17th August 1911 (being the commencement of
the Northern Rhodesia Order in Council, 1911).
(2) For the purpose of facilitating the application of the statutes referred to
in subsection (1), it shall be lawful for the Court to construe the same
with such verbal alterations, not affecting the substance, as may be
necessary to make the same applicable to the proceedings before the
Court.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
17(1) Civil appeals from subordinate courts shall be heard by one Judge except
where in any particular case the Chief Justice shall direct that the
appeal shall be heard by two Judges. Appeals in civil matters
(2) Where an appeal is heard by a bench of two Judges under the provisions
of this section and they are divided in opinion, the appeal shall be
dismissed.
19 (1) The Chief Justice may by statutory order under his hand appoint-
(a) the times at which Sessions shall normally be held in
Lusaka, Ndola, Kitwe, Livingstone, Mansa, Solwezi, Kabwe,
Mongu, Kasama and Chipata for the trial of persons committed
for trial before the Court by subordinate courts within such
Provinces or Districts as may be so appointed;
The number of Supreme Court and High Court judges is prescribed by the Supreme
Court and High Court (Number of Judges) Act, CAP of the Laws of Zambia.
1
1
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Currently, the Act provides for 11 Supreme Court Judges and 50 puisne High Court
Judges.
The Industrial and Labour Relations Court is established by the Industrial and
Labour Relations Act, Chapter 269 of the Laws of Zambia. The Act revises the law
relating to trade unions, the Zambia Congress of Trade Unions, employers’
associations, the Zambia Federation of Employers, recognition agreements and
collective agreements, settlement of collective disputes, strikes, lockouts, essential
services and the Tripartite Labour Consultative Council; the Industrial Relations
Court; repeals and replaces the Industrial Relations Act, 1990; and provides for
matters connected with or incidental to the foregoing.
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The part of the Act relevant to the Court is part XI. It consists of sections 84 – 97
which provide as follows:
85(1) The Court shall have original jurisdiction in all industrial relations
matters.
(2) The court shall have jurisdiction –
(a) to inquire into and make awards and decisions in
collective disputes and any other matters under this Act;
(b) to interpret the terms of awards, collective agreements
and recognition agreements;
(c) generally to inquire into and adjudicate upon any matter
affecting the collective rights, obligations and privileges
of employees, employers and representative
organizations or any matter relating to industrial
relations;
(d) to commit and punish for contempt any person who
disobeys or unlawfully refuses to carry out, or to be
bound by, an order made against him by the Court under
this Act; and
(e) to perform such acts and carry out such duties as may be
prescribed under this Act or any other written law. (3) The
Court shall not consider a complaint or an application
unless the complainant or applicant presents the
complaint or application to the Court-----
(a) within ninety days of exhausting the administrative
channels available to the complainant or applicant; or
(b) where there are administrative channels available to the
complainant or applicant, within ninety days of the
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(5) The Court shall not be bound by the rules of evidence in civil or
criminal proceedings, but the main object of the Court shall be
to do substantial justice between the parties before it.
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(4) The members, other than the Chairman and Deputy Chairmen,
shall hold office for a period of five years but shall be eligible for
re-appointment.
(5) The Chairman and Deputy Chairmen shall have the same tenure
and security of office as a judge of the High Court prescribed in
the Constitution in the Article relating to tenure of office of
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) The court, when hearing any matter, shall be duly constituted if
it consists of three members or such uneven number as the
Chairman may direct:
Provided that the Chairman or a Deputy Chairman may
deal with interlocutory matters and deliver a ruling or
make any order in chambers and may deliver any ruling
or judgement made by the Court duly constituted.
(4) A person shall not sit or act as a member of the Court or sit as
an assessor with the Court, if he has any interest direct or
indirect, personal or pecuniary, in any matter before the Court.
(5) The sittings of the Court shall be held in such places as the
Chairman may direct.
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) The Chairman may make rules providing for the procedure to be
followed on an application for a declaration under this section
and prescribing any fees which shall be payable on any
application.
91(1) At any hearing before the Court, any party may appear in person
or be represented –
(a) by any officer of a trade union or of an
association;
(b) by an officer of the Congress or of the Federation; or
(c) by a legal practitioner;
94(1) The Court shall deliver judgment within sixty days after the
hearing of the case.
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) Failure to deliver judgment, within the period stipulated in subsection (1)
shall amount to inability by the Chairman or Deputy Chairman to
perform the functions of his office and the provisions of
the Constitution in dealing with the inability by a judge to perform his
functions under the Constitution shall apply.
The Subordinate Courts hear the bulk of criminal cases although they have limited
sentencing and jurisdictional powers both in terms of matters that they may hear
and also in terms of geographical coverage. They also hear appeals from the local
courts. There are different classes of the Subordinate Courts. These are Class III,
Class II and Class I. All Class III and Class II Magistrates are lay Magistrates i.e. those
who are not legally trained. Appeals from the Subordinate Courts lie to the High
Court.
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
2
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
23 If, in any civil cause or matter before a Subordinate Court, the title
to any land is disputed, or the question of the ownership thereto
arises, the court may adjudicate thereon, if all parties interested
consent; but, if they do not all consent, the presiding magistrate
shall apply to the High Court to transfer such cause or matter to
itself.
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The local courts were historically separated from the rest of the Courts in that they
were not Courts of record and were expected to administer customary law. After
independence, however, they were formally integrated in the formal court
structure although they, to date, continue to be created under warrant and their
presiding officers continue to function on the basis of short term contracts. A
matter heard by the local Court is heard de novo by the Subordinate Court on
appeal.
This is an Act to provide for the recognition and establishment of local courts,
previously known as native courts, to amend and consolidate the law relating to
the jurisdiction of and procedure to be adopted by local courts; and to provide for
matters incidental thereto.
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) The court warrant of any local court shall specify the grade to which
such court belongs.
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
9 Subject to the provisions of this Act, a local court shall have and
may exercise jurisdiction, to such extent as may be prescribed
for the grade of court to which it belongs, over the hearing, trial
and determination of any criminal charge or matter in which
the accused is charged with having wholly or in part within the
area of jurisdiction of such court, committed, or been accessory
to the commission of an offence.
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) Any offence under African customary law, where such law is not
repugnant to natural justice or morality, may be dealt with by a
local court as an offence under such law notwithstanding that a
similar offence may be constituted by the Penal Code or by any
other written law:
Provided that such local court shall not impose any
punishment for such offence in excess of the
maximum permitted by the Penal Code or by such
other written law for such similar offence.
13 The Minister may, by statutory order, confer upon all or any local
courts jurisdiction to administer all or any of the provisions of
any written law specified in such order, and may, subject to the
limits referred to in subsection (1) of section five, specify
restrictions and limitations on the impositions of penalties by
such local courts on persons subject to their jurisdiction who
offend against such provisions.
1
3
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) Subject to the directions of the Director, a local courts officer may sit
as an adviser in any local court in any proceedings in which a legal
practitioner appears before such court under the provisions of
subsection (1).
(3) Subject to the provisions of subsection (1), a local court may permit
the spouse or guardian or a member of the household of any party
before such court, where such person gives satisfactory proof to the
court that he has authority in that behalf, to appear and act for such
party.
19
These notes are extracted from chapter 4 of the Mung’omba Constitutional Review Commission Report
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
holders of judicial office are determined are inseparable from the security of
tenure, the independence of the Judiciary and the impartiality of judicial officers.
Presently, the Constitution does not make any provision with respect to
emoluments, pensions and other conditions of service for Judges. These are dealt
with by the Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, Cap. 277. Section 3 of the Act states
that there shall be paid to a Judge such emoluments as the President may, by
statutory instrument, prescribe. Further, the Act, inter alia, empowers the
President to prescribe conditions of service for Judges. In the Mung’omba CRC’s
view, this state of affairs compromises the independence and impartiality of the
Judges at least in the minds of the people.
Against this background, the CRC recommended that the Constitution should
provide that: (a) the emoluments, pensions and other conditions of service of
Judges shall be reviewed and recommended in the first instance by the Judicial
Service Commission, and submitted to an independent National Fiscal and
Emoluments Commission, which shall make its recommendations to the National
Assembly for approval. Upon approval, these shall be prescribed by an Act of
Parliament; (b) the emoluments of Judges shall not be reduced without their
consent during their tenure of office; and (c) the emoluments, gratuity, pensions
and other dues under the conditions of service shall be a charge on the
Consolidated Fund of the Republic.
In the current Constitution, the security of tenure of judges is provided for by Article
98 of the Constitution. Under the provisions of Article 98 (3) of the Constitution,
the President is the authority that considers the question of removal from office of
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
a Judge of the Supreme Court or High Court. If the President deems it necessary,
he/she appoints a tribunal according to whose advice he/she must act. The
President may suspend a Judge pending investigations of a tribunal. This provision
has been the same since the 1964 Constitution. The grounds for removal of a judge
from office have also remained the same since 1964.
The Mung’omba CRC was of the view that the current provision is in conflict with
the principle of independence, impartiality and security of tenure of the Judiciary.
According to the CRC, the perceived impact of this is even greater when viewed
against the fact that the President also enjoys substantial power of appointment of
Judges. It was for this reason that the CRC felt that it is necessary to infuse checks
and balances into the procedure. In this regard, the CRC recommended, among
others, that the Judicial Complaints Authority shall initiate the process of the
removal of a Judge by referring the matter to the President, where the Authority
finds that the complaint has merit. The President shall then refer the matter to the
National Assembly, which shall appoint a tribunal, receive the report of the tribunal
and determine the matter.
In terms of the retirement age, the current constitutional provisions provide that a
judge shall vacate office upon attaining the age of 65 years. However, a judge who
has attained 65 years may be reappointed on contract for a period of seven
(07) years at the discretion of the President.
Against this background, the Law Association of Zambia, in its submissions to the
Mung’omba CRC, proposed that the retirement age for Judges should be raised
from 65 to 70 because currently almost all Judges are given seven-year contracts,
rendering the 65 years retirement age a fallacy (1). The Association further
submitted that the practice of awarding contracts to judges after they attain their
retirement age has potential to compromise judges. It was further proposed that a
Judge may opt for early retirement after attaining the age of 65 years, but before
turning 70 years.
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
After considering these submissions, the Mung’omba CRC recommended that the
Constitution should provide that: (a) Judges should be retired at the age of 75 and
that a Judge should have the option of early retirement after attaining the age of
65; and (b) for the avoidance of any doubt, a person who has retired as a Judge
should not be eligible for reappointment as a Judge.
In every government, there are three types of interrelated organs, namely the
Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Democratic governments the world
over are based firmly on the principle of separation of powers. This principle does
not mean that the three organs of Government should be wholly separated from
each other. On the contrary, they should operate in concert, but with “checks and
balances” that ensure that none of them encroaches on the legitimate domain of
the other.
Autonomy entails the ability to act and make decisions without being controlled by
anyone else. In relation to the judiciary, the concept of autonomy entails that the
judiciary should act and make decisions without being controlled by anyone be it
members of the Executive or the legislature.
The autonomy of the judiciary is essential to the fair and impartial administration
of justice and the very concept of the independence of the judiciary. The reason is
simple. There is no judiciary which can be independent if it is not autonomous.
Meanwhile, the importance of the concept of independence of the Judiciary has
been internationally recognised, as is shown by Article 2 of the United Nations Basic
Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary (1985). Article 2 provides that:
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
“The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and
in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influence,
inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any
quarter or for any reason.”
“(1) In the exercise of the judicial power of Ghana, the Judiciary, in both its judicial
and administrative functions, including financial administration, is subject only to
this Constitution and shall not be subject to the control or direction of any person
or authority.
(2) Neither the President nor Parliament nor any person acting under the authority
of the President or Parliament nor any other person whatsoever shall interfere with
judges or judicial officers or other persons exercising judicial power, in the exercise
of their judicial functions; and all organs and agencies of the State shall accord to
the courts such as the courts may reasonably require to protect the independence,
dignity and effectiveness of the courts, subject to this Constitution.”
The Constitutions of Uganda and South Africa have provisions with the same or
similar effect.
The predominant role of the Judiciary in any State is to interpret the laws of the
land fairly, and to dispense justice impartially, without fear or favour, between
individuals or the individual and the State. In this way, the Judiciary makes a
meaningful contribution to the maintenance of law and order and consequently
the maintenance of peace within a State, and enhances checks and balances in any
democratic state.
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
However, the Judiciary cannot effectively play its role if it does not enjoy an
entrenched independent status: its independence is essential in the impartial
administration of justice and adherence to the rule of law, and for the separation
of powers.
As the judicial organ of the Government, the Judiciary should inspire confidence in
the people it serves. It should not only be independent, but also be seen to be
independent and not subject to control by the other two arms of the Government.
This independence can be attained through the manner of appointment and
removal of Judges as well as the manner in which the judiciary is funded.
In relation to the Zambian judiciary, this means that we should be asking ourselves
the following questions: Who determines the funding of the judiciary? Who really
appoints our judges, magistrates and other judicial officers? Who really determines
the salary and other conditions of service for our judges, magistrates and other
judicial officers? Who really promotes and removes judges, magistrates and other
judicial officers from their office?
Only honest answers to these questions can help us ascertain the extent to which
our judiciary is autonomous and independent.
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
of the institution of courts and evidenced in the instruments and processes that
define their functions.
The rationale for this principle is that Judges should not feel inhibited in arriving at
just and fair judgments. In so doing, the Judiciary contributes effectively to
upholding the rule of law. However, the rule of law is not the rule of Judges for
were it to be so, then it would be justice according to Judges, but not justice
according to the law. To ensure the tenets of justice, our judicial system allows for
a hierarchy of appeals, ending in the Supreme Court, which is the final court in the
land.
The Zambian constitution has provisions on the independence and autonomy of the
judiciary. Article 91(2) provides that “the Judges, members, magistrates and
justices, as the case may be, of the courts mentioned in clause (1) shall be
independent, impartial and subject only to this Constitution and the law and shall
conduct themselves in accordance with a code of conduct promulgated by
Parliament”. Meanwhile, Article 91(2) provides that “the Judicature shall be
autonomous and shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of an
Act of Parliament”.
As contemplated by Article 91(2) of the constitution, the Judicature Act, Cap. 24,
of the laws of Zambia was enacted in 1994 with its objectives, in the main, as to
provide for the administration of courts and to confer on the Judicial Service
Commission the power to appoint staff of the Judicature.
The question that several commentators have been asking themselves is: Have
these constitutional and legislative provisions made the Zambian judiciary
autonomous and independent?
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
It is no wonder that the majority view is that something more needs to be done in
addition to these constitutional and legislative provisions to make the Zambian
judiciary truly autonomous and independent. More importantly is the manner of
funding the judiciary and that of appointment, promotion and removal of judges
from their office along with the determination of their conditions of service.
The judiciary itself, in its submissions to the Mung’omba CRC, made it very clear
that the cry of the judiciary was that the judiciary’s allocation from the national
budget ought to reflect its independent status and further that the allocation by
Parliament ought to be reasonable in proportion to the allocations given to the
other two arms of the Government. This cry was recently repeated by His Lordship,
Chief Justice Ernest Sakala in his speech at the opening of the Lusaka High Court
sessions for 2011. To use his own words:
“Over the past few years, the trend has been that less than 80 percent of the
approved budget released. This has no doubt negatively affected our projects
and programmes and we have even been unable to fulfill the obligations
relating to conditions of service of our support staff in terms of paying
terminal and other benefits. It is also defeating the very concept of an
autonomous judiciary”20.
20
The Post, No. 5191, Tuesday January 4, 2011, page 4.
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The present problem, in terms of funding, is that the budget of the Judiciary, like
that of any other Government institution, is subject to superintendence and
prescription by the Ministry responsible for finance before submission of the
estimates of revenue and expenditure by the Government to the National
Assembly. This is on the premise that the Ministry is in control of Government
revenue and expenditure. Once approved by Parliament, only a portion is released
and this is done through the Ministry in charge of finance.
It is in light of the above considerations that the Mung’omba CRC was of the view
that the Constitution should enhance the independence and impartiality of the
Judiciary in unequivocal terms and further that the independence and impartiality
of the judiciary should also reflect that the Judiciary is accountable to the people in
the manner in which it administers justice. This, the CRC felt, is important in the
promotion of justice and the rule of law. In this regard, the CRC recommended,
among others, that the Constitution should explicitly provide that:
• in the exercise of its judicial power, the Judiciary, in both its judicial and
administrative functions (including financial administration) should be
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
subject only to the Constitution and shall not be subject to the control or
direction of any person or authority;
• no member of the Executive or Legislature or any other person should
interfere with the Judges or judicial officers or other persons exercising
judicial power, in the exercise of their judicial functions, and all organs of the
State should accord such assistance as courts may require to protect their
independence, dignity and effectiveness, subject to the Constitution;
• the Judiciary should prepare its own budget estimates, whose determination
should be subject to negotiations with the Ministry responsible for finance,
and that this process should take into account the principles of
accountability, transparency and equitable sharing of resources;
• the Judiciary should be adequately funded and its allocations should be
released directly to the Judiciary; and
• the approved budget allocation should be a charge on the Consolidated Fund
of the Republic, whose establishment was recommended in Chapter 21 of
the Report.
Presently, the Constitution does not provide for the manner of appointment of
Magistrates and other judicial officers. Neither does it provide for their
qualifications: it only has provisions on the qualification and appointment of
Supreme and High Court judges.
However, Section 4 (1) of the Judicature Administration Act, Cap 24 confers on the
Judicial Service Commission power to appoint the Registrar, Deputy Registrar,
Assistant Registrar, Magistrates and other judicial officers. Sub-section (3) states
that these officers shall hold office on such terms and conditions as the Commission
may determine with the approval of the President.
1
4
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
the Mung’omba CRC that Article 95 of the Constitution should be amended to make
provision for Magistrates and other judicial officers to be appointed by the Judicial
Service Commission, and that they should hold office until the age of 55, unless
appointed as High Court Judges, with the proviso that Local Court Justices should
hold office until the age of 75 unless removed in accordance with Article 98 (1).
The Commission considered the submission from the Judiciary with respect to the
appointment of magistrates and other judicial officers and came to the conclusion
that in order to protect the independence, impartiality, integrity, dignity and
transparency of the Judiciary, the Constitution should make clear provision with
respect to the appointment, and terms and conditions of service of other judicial
officers.
The Commission also examined the Constitution of Ghana which not only makes
provision with respect to power of appointment of other judicial officers, but also
states that the terms and conditions of service of these officers shall be prescribed
by regulations made by the Judicial Council, acting in consultation with the Public
Service Commission and with the approval of the President.
With respect to the retirement age, the Mung’omba CRC concurred in principle
with the view of the Judiciary that Magistrates and other judicial officers should
retire at the normal retirement age in the Public Service. The CRC also agreed that
an exception to this should be made in the case of Local Court Justices, whose
retirement age should be 75 years. This is because these officers are regarded as a
reservoir of customary law.
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
The Commission was also of the view that the capacity of Subordinate Courts and
Local Courts should be strengthened. In this regard, the Commission observed that
these courts handle most of the criminal and civil cases, but they do not have
adequate competence and capacity. According to the CRC, there was need to
improve the conditions of service for staff in these courts in order to attract
competent and properly qualified personnel. The CRC also felt that it was essential
that Local Court Justices should be experts in the traditions and customs of the
specific communities in which they serve and that they should be recruited from
the local community, with the approval of the area Chief.
UNIT 8
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
8.1 Introduction
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Although it has several advantages, litigation equally has some disadvantages. The
disadvantages include the following;
The term "alternative dispute resolution" or "ADR" is often used to describe a wide
variety of dispute resolution mechanisms that are short of, or alternative to, full-
scale court processes. It is an effort to arrive at mutually acceptable decisions and
an alternative to adversarial processes such as litigation or administrative
processes that result in "win/lose" outcomes.
The term ADR can refer to everything from facilitated settlement negotiations in
which disputants are encouraged to negotiate directly with each other prior to
some other legal process, to arbitration systems or minitrials that look and feel very
much like a courtroom process. Processes designed to manage community tension
or facilitate community development issues can also be included within the rubric
of ADR. ADR systems may be generally categorized as negotiation,
conciliation/mediation, or arbitration systems.
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
There are four elements essential to the successful use of any ADR method. These
are:
• existence of an issue in controversy;
• voluntary agreement by both parties to participate in the ADR process;
• voluntary agreement by both parties on the type of ADR method to be used
in lieu of formal litigation;
• participation in the process by officials of both parties who have authority to
resolve the issue in controversy.
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1) Informality
ADR processes are less formal than judicial processes. In most cases, the rules of
procedure are flexible, without formal pleadings, extensive written documentation,
or rules of evidence. This informality is appealing and important for increasing
access to dispute resolution for parts of the population who may be intimidated by
or unable to participate in more formal systems. It is also important for reducing
the delay and cost of dispute resolution. Most systems operate without formal
representation.
2) Application of Equity
ADR processes are instruments for the application of equity rather than the rule of
law. Each case is decided by a neutral third party, or negotiated between parties to
the dispute themselves, based on principles and terms that seem equitable in the
particular case, rather than on uniformly applied legal standards. ADR systems
cannot be expected to establish legal precedent or implement changes in legal and
social norms. Thus, ADR systems tend to achieve efficient settlements at the
expense of consistent and uniform justice.
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(a) Voluntary nature of processes: All ADR methods are voluntary in nature i.e.
No one is coerced into using ADR procedures. Parties choose to use ADR
procedures because they believe that ADR holds the potential for better
settlements than those obtained through litigation;
(b) Expedited procedures: All ADR procedures are less formal. This prevents
unnecessary delays and expedites the resolution process.;
(c) Active participation of the parties: Parties to the dispute actively participate
in the ;
(d) Confidential nature of Processes: Parties can participate in ADR procedures,
explore potential settlement options, and still protect their right to present
their best case in court at a later date without fear that data divulged in the
procedure will be used against them;
(e) Greater Flexibility in the Terms of Settlement: ADR procedures provide an
opportunity for parties to craft settlements that can better meet their
combined interests than would an imposed settlement by a third party. This
is because ADR enables parties to avoid the trap of deciding who is right or
who is wrong, and to focus on the development of workable and acceptable
solutions. ADR procedures also provide greater flexibility in the parameters
of the issues under discussion and the scope of possible settlements.
Participants can "expand the pie" by developing settlements that address the
underlying causes of the dispute, rather than be constrained by a judicial
procedure that is limited to making judgments based on narrow points of
law;
(f) Savings in Time: With the significant delays in obtaining court dates, ADR
procedures offer expeditious opportunities to resolve disputes without
having to spend years in litigation. In many cases, where time is money and
where delayed settlements are extremely costly, a resolution developed
through the use of an ADR procedure may be the best alternative for a timely
resolution.
(g) Cost Savings: ADR procedures are generally less expensive than litigation.
Expenses can be lowered by limiting the costs of discovery, speeding up the
time between filing and settlement, and avoiding delay costs. These frontend
expenses are often the most costly components of legal costs. These savings
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
are in turn passed on to the taxpayer. Relieving the burden on the courts
caused by unnecessary or inappropriate lawsuits can help save valuable
public resources.
8.7 Some ADR methods
(a) Negotiation
A negotiation is a formal discussion between parties who are trying to resolve their
dispute without the involvement of a third party. The discussion may be initiated
by any of the parties to the dispute and may take place at such venue and time as
may be agreed by all the affected parties.
Direct, face-to-face negotiation between the parties, without the use of a third
party, involves the exchange of offers and counteroffers and a mutual discussion of
the strengths and weaknesses of each party’s position. This method is usually most
effective if both parties have an incentive to reach an agreed settlement.
(b) Conciliation
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(c) Mediation
Mediation is helpful when the parties are not making progress negotiating between
themselves. It is simply negotiation with the assistance of a neutral third party. The
neutral third party is called the mediator who should be impartial and acceptable
to both parties. His role is to assist or guide the parties in reaching agreement on a
mutually acceptable solution by creating a "safe" environment for the parties to
share information, address underlying problems, and vent emotions.
Although the mediator makes recommendations about the process, the parties
themselves make the important decisions about the problem-solving process and
the outcome. A successful mediation can give the parties the confidence in
themselves, each other, and consensual processes, to negotiate without a third
party in the future.
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Court annexed mediation has all the characteristics of the mediation just discussed
above. The only main difference between the two, as will be seen in due course, is
that court annexed mediation is invoked by an order of the court while ordinary
mediation is invoked by agreement between parties to the dispute.
Court annexed mediation was introduced to the Zambian Courts by the Washington
Superior Court through the assistance of USAID. The Zambian Court Annexed
Mediation system is therefore modeled along the lines of the Washington DC
Superior Court Mediation System.
It is important to state here that Court Annexed Mediation is not the only type of
mediation that exists or is practiced in Zambia. We have mediations that have no
connection whatsoever to the courts.
The statute that ushered Court annexed mediation in Zambia is the High Court
(Amendment) Rules21. The rules came into force in 1997. Subsequently, a group of
mediators was trained for purposes of taking conduct of some of the matters that
were before the High Court.
21
Statutory Instrument No. 71 of 1997
1
5
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
From the rule reproduced above, it is clear that it is the judge and not the parties
who makes the decision whether or not to refer the matter to mediation. In this
sense, it might be argued that court annexed mediation is not voluntary since
parties may not have a choice but to oblige to the court’s order referring the matter
to mediation. To the country, however, court annexed mediation is voluntary in the
sense that although parties are obliged to attempt mediation once the judge has
referred the matter to mediation, they are not compelled to settle: they are merely
compelled to attend the mediation because the referral order is an order of the
Court. Kelvin hang’ndu
Any matter referred to mediation, if not settled within sixty (60) days of the referral
to the mediator, is taken back to the trial judge.
(d) Arbitration
The essence of arbitration is that a third party renders an opinion about how the
dispute should be settled. The arbitration award (i.e. the decision of the arbitrator)
can be binding or non-binding, depending on the contract or other agreement of
the parties.
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
i. Agreement to arbitrate
Parties may only go to arbitration if they have voluntarily agreed that their dispute
will be resolved through arbitration. The parties’ voluntary agreement for their
dispute to be resolved is called an ‘agreement to arbitrate’. An agreement to
arbitrate may take the form of a clause in the contract or a separate agreement.
• There is formal presentation of each party’s case, much like a trial, though
not necessarily done in a courtroom. The Arbitrator controls the parties’ case
presentation and the reliability of the evidence presented;
• During the presentation of the case, strict rules of evidence and procedure
may not be followed;
• Each party’s evidence is presented by way of documents, depositions,
affidavits or oral testimony of witnesses, with full cross-examination.
• The Arbitration panel consists of one to three arbitrators;
• Unlike mediation proceedings during which private conversations between
the parties and between a party and the mediator are not uncommon,
private conversations between parties and the arbitrators are forbidden;
• The arbitration panel has full responsibility for rendering justice on the facts
and law and its award is binding and enforceable in the same as a judgement
of the court.
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
It must be noted that Arbitrators are usually selected on the basis of their expertise
in the area of dispute. For example, an arbitration panel for a construction contract
dispute might include an engineer, a contractor and an attorney.
v. A matter incidental to a matrimonial cause unless the Court grants leave for
arbitration to take place;
vii. A matter involving the interests of a minor or other person under legal
incapacity unless such minor or person is represented by a competent
person.
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
In terms of section 10 of the Act, a Court before which legal proceedings are
brought in relation to a matter that is subject of an arbitration agreement is obliged
to stay the proceedings and refer the matter to arbitration if either party to the
proceedings so requests. The rationale behind the provision is that if parties have
voluntarily agreed to submit to arbitration, then they should only be allowed to
come to court if they have attempted and failed to resolve their dispute through
arbitration.
And in terms of section 20(1) of the Act, an award made by an arbitrator or
arbitration tribunal pursuant to an arbitration agreement is, subject to the right of
either party to challenge the award by way of any process specified under the Act,
final and binding on both parties and on any person claiming through or under
them.
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Administrative tribunals are authorities outside the ordinary court system, which
interpret and apply the laws when acts of public administration are questioned in
formal suits by the courts or by other established methods. In other words, they
are agencies created by specific enactments to adjudicate upon disputes that may
arise in the course of implementation of the provisions of relevant enactments.
Administrative tribunals resolve, in the main,
• disputes between a private citizen and a central government department,
such as claims to social security benefits;
• disputes which require the application of specialised knowledge or expertise,
such as the assessment of compensation following the compulsory
acquisition of land;
• other disputes which by their nature or quantity are considered unsuitable
for ordinary courts, such as fixing a fair rent or rates for premises.
They are not a court nor are they an executive body. Rather they are a mixture of
both. They are judicial in the sense that the tribunals have to decide facts and apply
them impartially, without considering executive policy. They are administrative
because the reasons for preferring them to the ordinary courts of law are
administrative reasons.
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
They are established by the executive in accordance with statutory provisions. They
are required to act judicially and perform quasi-judicial functions. The proceedings
are deemed to be judicial proceedings and in certain procedural matters they have
powers of a civil court.
There are many reasons for the growth of administrative tribunals. Some of these
are:
• Administrative tribunals are a by-product of the Welfare State. In the 18th
and 19th centuries when 'laissez faire' theory held sway, the law courts
emerged as the custodians of the rights and liberties of the individual
citizens. Sometimes they protected the rights of all citizens at the cost of
state authority. With the emergence of Welfare State, social interest began
to be given precedence over the individual rights. With the development of
collective control over the conditions of employment, manner of living and
the elementary necessities of the people, there has arisen the need for a
technique of adjudication better fitted to respond to the social requirements
of the time than the elaborate and costly system of decision making provided
by the courts of law. In brief, 'judicialisation of administration' proved a
potential instrument for enforcing social policy and legislation.
• Secondly, as a result of rapid growth and expansion of industry, trade and
commerce, ordinary law courts are not in a position to cope up with the
work-load. The result is that there are enormous delays in deciding court
cases. Therefore, a number of administrative tribunals have been established
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
which can do the work more rapidly, more cheaply and more efficiently than
the ordinary courts.
• Thirdly, ordinary courts of law, on account of their elaborate procedures,
legalistic forms and attitudes can hardly render justice to the parties
concerned, in technical cases. Ordinary judges, brought up in the traditions
of law and jurisprudence, are not capable enough to understand technical
problems, which crop up in the wake of modem complex economic and social
processes. Only administrators having expert knowledge can tackle such
problems judiciously. To meet this requirement, a number of administrative
tribunals have come into existence.
• Fourthly, a good number of situations are such that they require quick and
firm action. Otherwise the interests of-the people may be jeopardized. For
instance, ensuring of safety measures in local mines, prevention of illegal
transactions in foreign exchange and unfair business practices necessitate
prompt action. Such cases, if are to be dealt with in the ordinary courts of
law, would cause immense loss to the state exchequer and undermine
national interest. However, the administrative courts presided over by the
experts would ensure prompt and fair action.
(a) Advantages
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(b) Disadvantages
Part IV
The Lands Tribunal
20(1) There is hereby established a Lands Tribunal.
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
(2) The Tribunal shall consist of the following members who shall be
appointed by the Minister:
(a) a Chairman who shall be qualified to be a judge of the High Court;
(b) a Deputy Chairman who shall be qualified to be appointed as
a judge of the High Court;
(c) an advocate from the Attorney-General’s Chambers;
(d) a registered town planner;
(e) a registered land surveyor;
(f) a registered valuation surveyor; and
(g) not more than three persons from the public and private sectors.
(3) The members referred to in paragraph (a) and (b) of subsection (2)
shall be appointed after consultation with the Judicial Service
Commission.
(4) The members of the Tribunal shall be appointed on such terms and
conditions as may be specified in their letters of appointment.
21 The Tribunal may appoint persons who have ability and experience in
land, agriculture, commerce or other relevant professional
qualifications as assessors for purposes of assisting it in the determination of any
matter under this Act. 22 The Tribunal shall have jurisdiction to –
(a) inquire into and make awards and decisions in any dispute
relating to land under this Act;
(b) to inquire into, and make awards and decisions relating to any
dispute of compensation to be paid under this Act;
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
6
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
1
7
LEGAL PROCESS NOTES
Sittings of the Tribunal are held in camera to ensure the privacy of the
parties. Matters are set for hearing within 6 weeks and disposed off in three
months.
1
7