Law Commons^™

Fundamental Rights Not So Fundamental? Critique Of The Supreme Court Judgment In Law Association Of Zambia V. The Attorney General, Muna B. Ndulo, Samuel Ngure Ndungu

Southern African Journal of Policy and Development

The article discusses the constitutionality of sections 5 and 6 of the Public Order Act of Zambia. The Law Association of Zambia had unsuccessfully argued in the High Court of Zambia that the sections violated section 20 (Freedom of expression) and 21 (Freedom of assembly) of the Zambian Constitution. The Supreme Court of Zambia upheld the decision of the High Court and held that the sections did not violate sections 20 and 21 of the constitution and were constitutional. This article argues that the Supreme Court decision is wrong and falls short of effectively protecting citizen’s rights of peaceful assembly …

Comment Data From Ceri, 4-3-2017, Cornell Erulemaking Initiative

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

This file contains comment data from ten live policy discussions held on RegulationRoom.org and SmartParticipation.com from May 2010 to November 2016. A cross-disciplinary group of Cornell researchers, the Cornell eRulemaking Initiative (CeRI), created the experimental platforms for public participation in policymaking processes. CeRI used selected live federal agency rulemakings and other policy discussions to discover how the design and process of online engagement can support public discussion that is informed, inclusive and insightful.

Vol. 1, Issue 1 Table Of Contents

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Katuka V Electoral Commission Of Zambia (2016/Cc/0025) [2016] Zmcc 2 (9 August 2016), Chanda Chungu

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Vol. 1, Issue 1 Masthead

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Katuka And Law Association Of Zambia Vs Inonge Wina And Others (2016/Cc/0010/2016/Cc/0011) [2016] Zmcc 1, Tinenenji Banda

SAIPAR Case Review

The discrete legal issue to be decided by the Court was whether the continued stay in office by the Vice President, Cabinet Ministers, Provisional Ministers and Deputy Ministers – after the dissolution of Parliament on 11th May, 2016, and after the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia Amendment Act No. 2 of 2016, was ultra vires the constitution and therefore unconstitutional. If unconstitutional, a follow up issue was whether the salaries, allowances, and emoluments drawn by the above officials during their unlawful stay in office should be repaid. The case was filed as three separate causes, but by consent of …

Editors Note, Tinenenji Banda

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Hichilema And Another V Lungu And Another (2016/Cc/0031) [2016] Zmcc 4 (5 September 2016), Minority Judgement, Dunia P. Zongwe

SAIPAR Case Review

On September 5th 2016, there was tension in the packed Constitutional Court. Three out of five Constitutional Court judges (i.e., Anne Mwewa-Sitali, Mugeni Mulenga and Palan Mulonda) dismissed the election petition of Presidential candidate Hakainde Hichilema and his running mate Geoffrey Mwamba, on the grounds that the time for hearing the petition had lapsed. The President of the Court Justice Hildah Chibomba, and Justice Margaret Munalula dissented.

Dividing the Court was the interpretation and effect of Articles 101(5) and 103(2) of the Constitution of Zambia. Articles 101 (5) and 103 (2) provide that the Constitutional Court must hear a Presidential …

Barriers To Participatory Erulemaking Platform Adoption: Lessons Learned From Regulationroom, Mary J. Newhart, Joshua D. Brooks

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

Rulemaking, the process through which United States (U.S.) federal government agencies develop major health, safety and economic regulations, was an early target of electronic government (e-government) efforts. Because it was an established decision-making process that had substantial formal requirements of transparency, public participation and responsiveness it seemed a perfect target for technology-supported participatory policymaking. It was believed that new technologies could transform rulemaking, increasing its democratic legitimacy and improving its policy outcomes by broadening the range of participating individuals and groups (Brandon and Carlitz, 2003; Coglianese, 2004; Noveck, 2004). Despite the promise of a more deliberative and democratic process, rulemaking …

Hichilema And Another V Lungu And Another (2016/Cc/0031) [2016] Zmcc 4 (5 September 2016), Majority Judgment, Muna Ndulo

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Ceri (Cornell E-Rulemaking) Moderator Protocol, Cornell Erulemaking Initiative

Cornell e-Rulemaking Initiative Publications

From 2005-2017, CeRI was a multidisciplinary group of Cornell University researchers engaged in theoretical and applied research, in partnership with government agencies and civil society groups, to discover how the design and process of online engagement can support public discussion that is informed, inclusive and insightful.

The Moderator Protocol was used by moderators (students in a Cornell Law School e-Government Clinic) to facilitate dialogue and discussion during live discussions on our RegulationRoom.org and SmartParticipation.com platforms. It is provided here as a resource and reference tool. Additional information on the project is available at SmartParticipation.com.