Harrington seeks judicial review in Masebo’s tribunal findings


FORMER Communications and Transport Minister William Harrington has sought judicial review to determine whether the new office bearers at Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) appointed by former Tourism Minister Sylvia Masebo obtained pecuniary advantage from her action.
Mr Harrington was the petitioner in the Rhoyda Kaoma-led Tribunal which was investigating Ms Masebo’s alleged professional misconduct but found that she did not breach the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act.
The Tribunal also cleared Ms Masebo because she did not gain any pecuniary advantage from her actions but Mr Harrington, who has now sued Attorney General Mumba Malila, said he was not satisfied with the findings of the tribunal.
He said the tribunal having upheld that the new officers at ZAWA were entitled to remuneration, was in itself pecuniary advantage to new officers which resulted from Ms Masebo’s action.
Mr Harrington said in his application for leave to apply for judicial review that the Tribunal should have proceeded to find that the Chongwe Member of Parliament was in breach of the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act.
This is for assisting another person to acquire pecuniary advantage.
Mr Harrington said he was dissatisfied with the findings of the Tribunal in paragraph six on page 128 of the final report in which it held that although they found that the minster dismissed the officers and that she had no power to dismiss them, there was no evidence before them to show that her conduct resulted in her acquiring pecuniary advantage.
Mr Harrington stated that the Tribunal acted unreasonably because the issue of pecuniary advantage was uncertain since it could now be assumed that there were many classes of pecuniary advantage some of which were acceptable and others were not.
He also wants leave to be granted to determine whether there existed various classes of pecuniary advantages, acquisition of which would be said to be misconduct on one hand and not misconduct on the other hand.