MAGISTRATE Joshua Banda yesterday told lawyers representing Rupiah Banda that he cannot be curtailed or influenced by reports in the media following a complaint about The Post’s reportage on the Nigerian oil deal case....
When the matter came up for mention and setting dates for ruling on case or no case to answer, Banda’s lawyers, led by Professor Patrick Mvunga, raised concern with the manner The Post was reporting on the Nigerian oil deal case, saying the newspaper must be made to stop making commentaries and judgments on matters which were active in court.
But magistrate Banda said the court could not be curtailed or influenced by reports in the media. “This court will not be influenced by articles in the media whether print, broadcast or online like I have stated before on similar issues. The defence should take an appropriate step as is the case with honourable Mulife, who is handling contempt matters. If you (defence) feel it is really contemptuous, you can commence contempt proceedings so that the rule of law is observed.
This court can’t be curtailed or influenced by media reports or publications. Judiciary proceedings are made based on the information captured in the proceedings in accordance with the rule of law,” magistrate Banda said. Earlier, Prof Mvunga complained that The Post was behaving like an alternative court. Prof Mvunga said the newspaper had been carrying parallel proceedings while the court was sitting. He cited an article published on April 26 under the headline ‘Nigerians ready for Rupiah’ as an indication of court interference. Prof Mvunga wondered why the Nigerian (Suraju) quoted in the article could not take stand in court as opposed to speaking through the media. “Suraju is an eminent Nigerian imported into this country,” he said. He cited another article of April 24 headlined ‘Nigerians want Henry extradited’, which he said was contemptuous. “This is contemptuous, we only have one judicial system. It is about time The Post was told to stop making rulings on cases that are still in court.
This is total defiance of the court process, which amounts to making judgments before this court decides. We can’t have such a situation. We abide by the due process of the law; these are the tenets that we are bound by and we can’t be frustrated. The accused is a former head of state who is entitled to the due process of the law and we can’t be having judgments before the court is concluded,” Prof Mvunga said. He further said the article published in The Post on April 25 made a ruling on a matter active in court. Prof Mvunga said as Banda’s counsel, they felt obligated to raise concerns before court. He also said they brought their concerns before court because there were many contempt proceedings against The Post. “If The Post doesn’t want to take part in these proceedings, I think they should be barred and kept at Bwinjimfumu Road. It’s about time the rule of law was asserted effectively and it has been the benchmark for our judicial system.
We don’t want to have a self-styled court making commentaries and judgments. Why can’t they leave this court to take its course?” said Prof Mvunga. Banda is in this matter alleged to have on unknown dates but between May 1, 2008 and September 24, 2011 in Lusaka, being a person employed in the public service as Republican president, procured a Nigerian government-to-government oil contract in the Republic of Zambia’s name which he, in fact, meant to benefit himself and his family.
The allegation further stated that Banda instructed his son, Henry, to determine the destination of the proceeds of this contract, thereby causing the country to lose US$2.5 million. Magistrate Banda set June 26 as the date for ruling. - See more at: http://postzambia.com/news.php?id=7597#sthash.En7Ex9U3.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment