African Studies Commons^™

Volume 8, Issue 2 Title Page

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 8, Issue 2 Table Of Contents

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Editorial Board

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Rights Vs Rules: A Commentary On Nathan Mubanga (Suing As The Father And Next Friend Of A Minor Cm) And Anor V Attorney General (2023/Hp/0403) Zmhc3 (19 February 2025), Chanda Mwape

SAIPAR Case Review

The High Court of Zambia upheld a school's refusal to admit a Rastafari child with dreadlocks. The author argues that the Court erred by failing to consider regional jurisprudence, international human rights trends, and the historical context of discrimination against natural African hair. The piece contends that requiring Rastafari children to cut their dreadlocks to access public education effectively denies them their rights to education, freedom of religion, and protection from discrimination.

Brenda Mpashi V Attorney General And Anor (2024/Ccz/005) [2025] Zmcc 4 (20 February 2025): The Constitutionality Of Ouster Clauses In A Democratic And Constitutional Dispensation, Mwami Kabwabwa, Madrine Mukabili

SAIPAR Case Review

Transformative constitutionalism requires Courts to adjudicate in a manner that advances substantive justice, protects rights, and ensures that all exercises of public power are justified in constitutional terms. In Brenda Mpashi, the Constitutional Court adopted a formalistic interpretive approach that prioritised administrative finality over constitutional accountability. By accepting Regulation 10A as an effective ouster clause, the Court insulated presidential action from judicial scrutiny and weakened the culture of justification, which is a fundamental principle in a constitutional democracy.

A more transformative approach would have scrutinised the constitutionality of the ouster clause, assessed its compatibility with Article 18(9) and the principle …

Digital Currency In Legal Limbo, From Uncertainty To Precedent In Tanzania: Yellow Card (T) Ltd Vs. Nyamwero Michael Nyamwero (Hc: Commercial Case No. 12171 Of 2024), Jackson Simango Magoge

SAIPAR Case Review

The abstract below was generated using artificial intelligence. It has not been endorsed by the author.

This article analyzes Yellow Card (T) Ltd v. Nyamwero Michael Nyamwero (HC Commercial Case No. 12171 of 2024), a landmark Tanzanian case addressing the legal status of cryptocurrency transactions in a jurisdiction lacking a formal regulatory framework. The dispute arose from the alleged misappropriation of funds by a former company director and his subsequent breach of a settlement agreement requiring repayment. The court held in favor of the plaintiff, concluding that although cryptocurrency activities remain unregulated in Tanzania, they are not inherently illegal. Accordingly, …

Editorial Note, O'Brien Kaaba, Emmanuel Nyambe

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 8, Issue 1 Title Page

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Editorial Board

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Conservation Advocates Zambia Limited V The Attorney General (2023/Ccz/0018) [2024] Zmcc 6, Emmanuel N. Nyambe

SAIPAR Case Review

The author explores Conservation Advocates Zambia Limited v The Attorney General, contrasting the majority’s application of the constitutional avoidance doctrine with a forceful dissent. The majority declined to hear an environmental petition, classifying the grievances as statutory rather than constitutional. The author aligns with the dissent, arguing that such reasoning sidesteps the judiciary’s constitutional mandate to protect and promote environmental rights. The case presents a fundamental choice for the Court: whether to treat the Constitution as a source of aspirational guidance or as a directly enforceable instrument of environmental accountability and public participation.

Isaac Mwanza And Zambia Civil Liberties Union (Zclu) V The Attorney General 2024/Ccz/008, Emmanuel Banda

SAIPAR Case Review

This contribution considers Isaac Mwanza and Zambia Civil Liberties Union (ZCLU) v Attorney General, a case challenging the constitutionality of longstanding penal provisions criminalising same-sex relations. The author takes issue with the Constitutional Court’s refusal to entertain the matter on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that it misconstrued the relationship between Articles 28 and 128 of the Constitution. By deferring entirely to the High Court on Bill of Rights issues, the author contends, the Constitutional Court has left a significant gap: legislation that may violate fundamental rights now lacks a clear constitutional forum for challenge. The piece underscores a persistent ambiguity in …

Volume 8, Issue 1 Table Of Contents

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Editorial Note, O'Brien Kaaba, Emmanuel Nyambe

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Coercing Virtue Or Superintending Constitutional Order? A Comment On Munir Zulu And Celestine Mukandila V Attorney General, O'Brien Kaaba, Emmanuel N. Nyambe

SAIPAR Case Review

In Munir Zulu and Celestine Mukandila v Attorney General, the Constitutional Court of Zambia intervened for the first time in a constitutional amendment process before a bill was tabled, asserting its authority to oversee executive conduct in line with constitutional principles. While the author commends the Court’s departure from a historically passive judiciary, a pointed critique is offered of the judgment’s conceptual shortcomings. The analysis highlights the Court’s conflation of constituent and constituted power, its reliance on an inaccurate historical account of past amendments, and the jurisdictional inconsistency it created with the earlier Bill 10 ruling, all of which weaken …

The Attorney General V Rajan Mahthani (Appeal No. 4 Of 2020) [2025] Zmsc (24 July 2025): Judicial Recusal And Why It Is Important To Strike A Balance, Mwami Kabwabwa

SAIPAR Case Review

This contribution examines The Attorney General v Rajan Mahthani, a Supreme Court ruling on judicial recusal. The author critically assesses the Court’s insistence on proving actual, extrajudicial bias as a prerequisite for recusal. Though the importance of shielding the judiciary from frivolous motions is acknowledged, the piece warns that the Court’s rigid stance, paired with its admonishing tone, may undermine the right to a fair hearing guaranteed under Article 18 of the Constitution. Drawing on South African and Kenyan jurisprudence, the author proposes adopting a “reasonable apprehension of bias” standard that respects judicial independence while safeguarding public confidence in the …

Volume 7, Issue 2 Title Page

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 7, Number 2 Editorial Board

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 7, Issue 2 Table Of Contents

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Editorial Note, O'Brien Kaaba, Madrine Mukabili, Emmanuel Nyambe

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 7, Issue 1 Title Page

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 7, Issue 1 Table Of Contents

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Volume 7, Issue 1 Masthead

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Editorial Note, O'Brien Kaaba, Madrine Mukabili

SAIPAR Case Review

No abstract provided.

Sicelo Edgar Mpanza N.O V Jabulile Lucy Mpanza And Others (28/2023) [2023] Szsc 59 (18/122023), Phakama C. Shili, Simangele D. Mavundla

SAIPAR Case Review

This case note provides a critical analysis of the landmark Eswatini Supreme Court case of Mpanza v Mpanza as it pertains to nullification of colonial legislative provisions that discriminate against individuals who were married under customary law during their lifetime by exempting their estates from the jurisdiction of the Master of the High Court. Section 68 of the Administration of Estates Act of 1902 regulates the administration of the estates of Africans who die having contracted a customary marriage and encompasses specific clauses that establish the exclusion of the estates from the jurisdiction of the Master of the High Court. …

Pheluna Hatembo & Milton Hatembo V. Hakainde Hichilema (2020/Hp/1128), Muna B. Ndulo

SAIPAR Case Review

The case in question involved an application by the defendant to dismiss the matter as statute-barred, citing the Limitation Act of 1939. The High Court, in deciding the matter made reference to the Supreme Court's holding in the case of Daniel Mwale v. Njolomo Mtonga, which reiterated that, the limitation period begins when there is a party capable of suing and another capable of being sued, and all material facts have occurred. The court also emphasized that the statute of limitation can be raised at any stage of proceedings.

Chillerton Group Limited V Konkola Mineral Resources Limited And Konkola Copper Mines Plc Appeal No. 215/2023, Mwaba Chileya Mulenga

SAIPAR Case Review

This case highlights the legal complexity between surface rights holders and mining rights holders over the same land area. The Court of Appeal had an opportunity to address an important issue which is the relationship between these conflicting property rights, in a way that could clarify the interpretation of the Mines and Minerals Act with regards to surface rights law. However, it missed the chance to address the full scope of this tension, particularly the notion of ‘correlative rights’ between mining and surface rights holders. In this judgment, the Court maintained that surface rights disputes should be resolved under land …

Graduare Property Development Limited V A & J Interiors Limited Appeal No. 253/2023, Clement Ngoma

SAIPAR Case Review

This case underscores the importance of courts adhering to the well-established principle that issues not raised during the trial cannot be introduced as grounds of appeal. In this judgment, the Court of Appeal had an opportunity to clarify the legal implications of the non-registration of lease agreements, but it also highlighted the broader issue of raising legal points at any stage of proceedings, including on appeal. Despite the non-registration of the lease agreement, the Court of Appeal emphasized that such a legal issue could still be addressed during an appeal, reaffirming the flexibility of legal proceedings in protecting the rights …

A Botched Procedure For Removing A High Court Judge: A Critique Of Joshua Ndipyola Banda V Attorney General 2022/Ccz/0010, O'Brien Kaaba

SAIPAR Case Review

The judiciary performs a key role in implementing the constitution and safeguarding constitutional order. Democracy cannot thrive when the judiciary is pliant. An independent judiciary is fundamental to constitutional democracy. Not only should judges be appointed in a transparent and credible manner, but their removal should insulate the judiciary from potential reprisals. Certainly, incompetent, and professionally unfit judges should have no place in the judiciary and judges who grossly misconduct themselves should be held accountable and in extreme cases, must be removed from office. However, how judges are removed has an impact on the autonomy of the judiciary. If the …

Sangwa V Attorney General And Law Association Of Zambia (2021 /Ccz/0012) [2023] Zmcc 6 (31 July 2023), Hope Sthembile Homela, Robert Farbman, J. P. Swenson

SAIPAR Case Review

This case underscores the critical need for the judiciary to assert its financial independence, ensuring that its budget and resources are not subject to undue influence or control by the executive. In this landmark ruling, the Constitutional Court missed an important opportunity to set a stronger precedent for the autonomy of the judiciary by not fully addressing the constitutional violations at hand relating to the financial independence of the judiciary. The Court’s decision, while acknowledging the issue of financial independence, failed to provide a decisive remedy to protect the judiciary from the continuing risk of executive interference. Recognizing the necessity …

Julius Sibanda V Flat Mooyo (2019/Hp/A026) [2024] (30 April 2024), Mwami Kabwabwa

SAIPAR Case Review

This case calls upon the judiciary to move beyond a rigid application of customary law and thoughtfully consider the gender implications in matters of child custody and marital dissolution. In this pivotal judgment, the High Court had an opportunity to address the application of Ndebele customary law, particularly the custom that grants fathers sole custody of children after lobola is paid. However, the court missed a crucial chance to engage deeply with the evolving nature of customary law, which should be interpreted in a manner that upholds gender equality and constitutional rights.