Вход на сайт

Просмотр новости

Найдите то, что Вас интересует

Brenda Mpashi v Attorney General and Anor (2024/CCZ/005) [2025] ZMCC 4 (20 February 2025): The Constitutionality of Ouster Clauses in a Democratic and Constitutional Dispensation

Дата публикации: 05-03-2026 18:27:00



Transformative constitutionalism requires Courts to adjudicate in a manner that advances substantive justice, protects rights, and ensures that all exercises of public power are justified in constitutional terms. In Brenda Mpashi, the Constitutional Court adopted a formalistic interpretive approach that prioritised administrative finality over constitutional accountability. By accepting Regulation 10A as an effective ouster clause, the Court insulated presidential action from judicial scrutiny and weakened the culture of justification, which is a fundamental principle in a constitutional democracy.
A more transformative approach would have scrutinised the constitutionality of the ouster clause, assessed its compatibility with Article 18(9) and the principle of constitutional supremacy, and affirmed the judiciary’s role as the ultimate guardian of constitutional rights. The judgment thus underscores the need for a value-driven jurisprudence in cases involving review of executive power.



Основное содержимое страницы с новостью.

Publication Date

11-2025

Abstract

Transformative constitutionalism requires Courts to adjudicate in a manner that advances substantive justice, protects rights, and ensures that all exercises of public power are justified in constitutional terms. In Brenda Mpashi, the Constitutional Court adopted a formalistic interpretive approach that prioritised administrative finality over constitutional accountability. By accepting Regulation 10A as an effective ouster clause, the Court insulated presidential action from judicial scrutiny and weakened the culture of justification, which is a fundamental principle in a constitutional democracy.

A more transformative approach would have scrutinised the constitutionality of the ouster clause, assessed its compatibility with Article 18(9) and the principle of constitutional supremacy, and affirmed the judiciary’s role as the ultimate guardian of constitutional rights. The judgment thus underscores the need for a value-driven jurisprudence in cases involving review of executive power.

Recommended Citation

Kabwabwa, Mwami and Mukabili, Madrine (2025) "Brenda Mpashi v Attorney General and Anor (2024/CCZ/005) [2025] ZMCC 4 (20 February 2025): The Constitutionality of Ouster Clauses in a Democratic and Constitutional Dispensation," SAIPAR Case Review: Vol. 8: Iss. 2, Article 6.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/scr/vol8/iss2/6

DOWNLOADS

Since March 05, 2026

COinS

Схожие новости

#Наименование новостиТональностьИнформативностьДата публикации
1Rights vs Rules: A Commentary on Nathan Mubanga (Suing as the Father and Next Friend of a Minor CM) and Anor v Attorney General (2023/HP/0403) ZMHC3 (19 February 2025)07.8805-03-2026
2Digital Currency in Legal Limbo, From Uncertainty to Precedent in Tanzania: Yellow Card (T) Ltd VS. Nyamwero Michael Nyamwero (HC: Commercial Case No. 12171 of 2024)07.8805-03-2026
3Administrative Acquiescence: An Analysis of Nonadverse Litigation Involving Administrative Agencies04.901-09-2026
4Sex on Trial06.9610-07-2026
5Transforming Indigent Appellate Advocacy07.8218-05-2026
6South Africa: Violence Against Women 'Inhuman', Says President Ramaphosa05.6330-09-2026
7Lesotho MP to Repay R6-Million in Tender Fraud Case012.6510-09-2026
8Extradition in the Early Republic: International Law and Constitutional Authority04.3601-09-2026
9Native Marburys: Judicial Review in Tribal Courts04.8801-09-2026
10Malawi: The Awkward History of Malawi's Attorney General Mbeta08.0924-09-2026

Классификация: . Схожих патентов: 0. Схожих новостей: 10. Тональность: 0. Информативность: 8.63. Источник: scholarship.law.cornell.edu.