The independence of the judiciary in a multi-Party state: Zambia as a case study(1990-2003)
More often than not both opposition political parties and civil society have raised concern that judiciary is not independent as it is compromised. They allege that despite the country reverting to multiparty political system, some members of the bench are partisan and are there to serve the interests of the ruling party.Conversely, the members of the ruling party have also complained that some judges are being used by the opposition political parties to frustrate their policies or to facilitate their downfall. These attacks and suspicions have come at a time when the courts have made decisions against any of the above complainants. The judiciary has remained at the crossroad. It has to provide the checks and balances. This paper sought to establish the actual position as to whether or not the allegations are justified.Consequently, the study has revealed that judges are human beings and have their own social and political convictions. It has been established that enough legislations have been introduced in the period between 1990 and 2003, which guarantee the independence of the judiciary but there is no political will by the political party in power to ensure their full implementation. This is because the independence of the courts is at variance with political survival.
Judicial independence--Zambia, Separation of powers--Zambia
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations