{"title":"赞比亚最高法院的一项奇怪裁决:因民事藐视罪被判六年监禁?","authors":"Christopher Phiri","doi":"10.1163/17087384-12340046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nOn 23 November 2018, the Supreme Court of Zambia delivered a judgement which suggests that Zambian judges have virtually unbridled power to move on their own motion to punish for contempt of court anyone who criticises their judicial decisions. This article considers that judgement. It argues that whilst justice might well have been done in the case in question, it was certainly not seen to be done. Two main reasons are given for this argument. First, the judges appeared to have acted both as prosecutors and adjudicators in their own cause when it was neither urgent nor imperative to act immediately on their own motion. Second, the classification by the Court of the contempt in question as civil contempt rather than criminal contempt is alien to the common law world. The article culminates in a clarion call for the Zambian legislature to intervene and clarify the law of contempt of court to avert capricious and unbridled invocation of the judicial power to punish for contempt.","PeriodicalId":41565,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":"115-138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17087384-12340046","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Curious Decision by Zambia’s Highest Court: Six Years Imprisonment for Civil Contempt?\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Phiri\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/17087384-12340046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nOn 23 November 2018, the Supreme Court of Zambia delivered a judgement which suggests that Zambian judges have virtually unbridled power to move on their own motion to punish for contempt of court anyone who criticises their judicial decisions. This article considers that judgement. It argues that whilst justice might well have been done in the case in question, it was certainly not seen to be done. Two main reasons are given for this argument. First, the judges appeared to have acted both as prosecutors and adjudicators in their own cause when it was neither urgent nor imperative to act immediately on their own motion. Second, the classification by the Court of the contempt in question as civil contempt rather than criminal contempt is alien to the common law world. The article culminates in a clarion call for the Zambian legislature to intervene and clarify the law of contempt of court to avert capricious and unbridled invocation of the judicial power to punish for contempt.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41565,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"115-138\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/17087384-12340046\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/17087384-12340046\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17087384-12340046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
A Curious Decision by Zambia’s Highest Court: Six Years Imprisonment for Civil Contempt?
On 23 November 2018, the Supreme Court of Zambia delivered a judgement which suggests that Zambian judges have virtually unbridled power to move on their own motion to punish for contempt of court anyone who criticises their judicial decisions. This article considers that judgement. It argues that whilst justice might well have been done in the case in question, it was certainly not seen to be done. Two main reasons are given for this argument. First, the judges appeared to have acted both as prosecutors and adjudicators in their own cause when it was neither urgent nor imperative to act immediately on their own motion. Second, the classification by the Court of the contempt in question as civil contempt rather than criminal contempt is alien to the common law world. The article culminates in a clarion call for the Zambian legislature to intervene and clarify the law of contempt of court to avert capricious and unbridled invocation of the judicial power to punish for contempt.
期刊介绍:
The African Journal of Legal Studies (AJLS) is a peer-reviewed and interdisciplinary academic journal focusing on human rights and rule of law issues in Africa as analyzed by lawyers, economists, political scientists and others drawn from throughout the continent and the world. The journal, which was established by the Africa Law Institute and is now co-published in collaboration with Brill | Nijhoff, aims to serve as the leading forum for the thoughtful and scholarly engagement of a broad range of complex issues at the intersection of law, public policy and social change in Africa. AJLS places emphasis on presenting a diversity of perspectives on fundamental, long-term, systemic problems of human rights and governance, as well as emerging issues, and possible solutions to them. Towards this end, AJLS encourages critical reflections that are based on empirical observations and experience as well as theoretical and multi-disciplinary approaches.