State concedes to submission by HH’s lawyers

HH arrives at Court grounds

The State has conceded to the submission by lawyers representing UPND leader Hakainde Hichilema that the treason case before the Lusaka Magistrate Court raises constitutional issues.

When the matter came up today for continued submissions before Magistrate David Simuusamba, the State submitted that the constitutional questions raised by the defence team were not vexatious.

The State has however, argued that Section 255 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) does not allow the Magistrate Court to hear an inquiry of the charge upon which a certificate of committal has been issued.

State prosecutors reminded the Court that it has the duty to refer the treason charge before it to the High Court for trial.

They further argued that discrepancies on the Certificate of Committal in relation to the names of the accused noted by the defence can be dealt with in the High Court.

State has also contended that the National Prosecution Authority Act gives authority to the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) to delegate the issuance of the Certificate of Committal of a charge.

But in response to the submissions by the State, the defence team argued that the fact that the State has agreed to the submission that the constitutional issues raised are not vexatious, section 255 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been overridden by Article 28 of the Republican Constitution.

The defence team has insisted that the Certificate of Committal of the treason charge facing their clients must therefore be ignored by the Magistrate Court.

They have argued that the Certificate of Committal by the DPP cannot take away the power of the Magistrate Court to refer constitutional matters to the High Court for determination.

The defence team has further contended that by relying on Section 255 of the CPC, the State is only trying to gag the Magistrate court into accepting that it has no such powers.

Magistrate Simuusamba has since reserved ruling to 11^th May.