Three United National Independence Party (UNIP) members have asked the Lusaka High Court to order their party president Tilyenji Kaunda, his deputy Njekwa Anamela and the Secretary General Kenneth Kaira to vacate UNIP offices and put in place an interim committee to call for fresh elections because the trio have overstayed in office.
The plaintiffs, Jairus Chakulunta, Charles Lubasi and Mwansa Musunte, in their statement of claim filed in the Lusaka High Court are seeking a declaration that the continued stay of the respondents in office was in violation of the UNIP constitution.
The plaintiffs submitted that according to the provisions of the constitution of UNIP, the office bearers that were elected at the general congress were to serve a term of five years after which fresh elections were to be called.
They further submitted that in the year 2000, the late Francis Nkoma was removed as party president and an extra ordinary council was held in Kabwe in 2001 where Mr Kaunda was elected as president of the Party.
They added that according to the party constitution, the tenure of office of the executive committee of the party came to a close at the end of 2005 in line with the provisions of the party Constitution.
The Plaintiffs seek the Court’s indulgence in claiming a declaration that the resolution passed by the respondents in 2008 at Garden House Motel purporting to give effect to their continued stay in office was in violation of the constitution of the party.
They also seek a declaration that the appointment of Mr Kaira as Secretary General of the Party was done in violation of the constitution of the party and therefore null and void.
The trios are seeking an order to compell the respondents to comply with the constitution and call for fresh elections where executive positions would be filled in line with the party constitution provisions.
They also want damages and costs. The matter which was scheduled for inter party hearing was adjourned after the defendant’s lawyer Langton Mwanabo requested for an adjournment because his two witnesses were not before court. But one of the plaintiffs’ laywer a Mr Musunte argued that the matter had been dragging since 2013 because of adjournments.
Mr Munsute said this year was an election year and the matter should be hurried in case they won, because they needed to go for a convention.