Security agencies ordered three-day closure of Zambia’s courts, AG tells ConCourt

INSTITUTIONS

By ZPP Newsroom

Source: Zambian Observer

Security agencies ordered three-day closure of Zambia’s courts, AG tells ConCourt
Zambia's Attorney-General, Mulilo Kabesha, has defended the contentious three-day nationwide closure of judicial complexes that occurred last August, informing the Constitutional Court that the directive originated directly from national security agencies rather than the judiciary itself. Speaking in response to a petition filed by the Chapter One Foundation, which is challenging the constitutionality of the shutdown, Kabesha maintained that the State acted out of an abundance of caution to preempt perceived security threats. He argued that investigative and security wings are under no constitutional obligation to disclose the full scope or nature of such threats to the public or state organs. The unprecedented closure of the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Court, and various lower courts across the country took place on August 24, a date that critically marked the final legal deadline for opposition figures to challenge the results of the hotly contested August 13 general elections. The timing immediately ignited a firestorm of criticism from legal practitioners, opposition politicians, and civil society organizations, who pointed out that sealing off judicial access effectively frustrated constitutional rights to dispute electoral outcomes. Prominent bodies, including the Law Association of Zambia, demanded formal transparency regarding how litigants would be accommodated, noting the severe implications for access to justice. In his defense before the bench, Kabesha drew parallels between the August security shutdown and the operational disruptions experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, asserting that precautionary state actions should not automatically be misconstrued as malicious interference. He emphasized that when security concerns are flagged, standard protocol dictates discretion, stating that the government cannot wait for a threat to manifest into a tangible catastrophe before implementing preventive measures. Furthermore, the Attorney-General cont