Minority judgment warns against ‘constitutional avoidance’

A new judgment by Zambia’s Constitutional Court has dismissed a challenge to the country’s wildlife protection authorities brought by an environmental protection organisation, saying the dispute wasn’t an intrinsically constitutional matter. But, as Carmel Rickard explains in her A Matter of Justice column on the Legalbrief site, a notable minority judgment by a member of the Bench hearing the case disagreed with that approach. Judge Martin Musaluke said that ultimately ‘all legal issues’ were constitutional, and asked: ‘Who apart from this court ought to protect (these) values and principles?’ In a strongly pro-environment decision, he quoted Zambia’s international treaty obligations and added: ‘If a value or principle of the Constitution is violated, should that not be the preserve of this court to deal with?’

A Matter of Justice

Zambia judgment