Mombotwa & Others v The People (Appeal 152 of 2017) [2018] ZMSC 308 (10 September 2018)

IN THE UPREME COURT FOR Z~1BIA APP~AL_ NO. 152/_153L HOLDEN AT NDOLA 154 2017 (Criniinui Ju risclictio11) BETWEEN: AFUMBA MOMBOTWA PELEKELO LlKANDO APPELLANT SYLVESTOR KALIMA INAMBAO 3RD APPE,LLANT AND THE PEOPLE RESPONDE. NT Coram: MuyoV\ve, Han1aundu and Chinyama, JJS. On 4 it1 Sept rm bn, 20 18 and I 0 1h Sept~ m bcr. 201 S. For ·the Appdlants: Mr Vic.tor Kach aka of ICN Legal Practit·ioncrs and Mr Paul Chavula, Senior Legal Aid Counsel o:f the Legal Aid Board. Fo.r the Respondent: Mrs R. N. Khuzwayoi Chief State Advocate of the· National Prosecutions Authority. JUQGMENT I Chinya.ma. JS, delivered the Judgment of the Cuurt. I I I I Cases referred to: 1. Pen.ias Tembo v the People (1980) Z. R. 218 2. Tlfe People V" Antif~llow Chigaba, SC. Z Judgment No. ·54 of 2017 ·, Jl 3, The People v The Pti:nclpal Re$ldent Magistrate E1' Pnrtc Faustine Kabwe and Aaron Chungu [2009) Z . R . 170 -4. Miller v b1inister of Pensions (1947) 2 ;\l,J.. E~ 372 S. Mwewa Murono v U1e People (2004) Z.. R. '207 6 . Saluwema v The People (1965) Z. R. 4 Legislation and othe r w orks r eferred to: 1. The Penal Code, Chapter 8 7 of th e Laws of Zambia, sectio ns 22 and 45(b} ~ - The Constit.u-tlon of Zambia. (as a.m ended i n l996), A rlicle 3-3 {2) 3, T!te Provincial <111d District Boundari~ Act, Chati~r 286 of tb.e Laws of Zambia 4 . Tb e Crim in11.l P rocedure Code, Chapter 88 of t he Laws of Zamb ia , section s 206 and 291(l} s. The Supreme Oo-iut Act, Cb apter 25 Qf the L;1ws of Zam,bia 6. 'the :Sarotselnnd Agreement, 1964 1'ne U,ree appellan ts, /\fu1nba Mornbot·wu1 Pelekelo Likando .,nu Sylvcth~r J<ali11"\t1 lnambflo w~re· chru·gccl viit i'l and convicted on one: Q01..tr1 I nf 111<• ofrtl-nt;e of Treason- fta:lony r.ont ra ry to section 45(bl of the Penal Code. Thr partlc:t\1111·~ elf 011~nce aJle?,t:fl ~liil.l , lit! appe1lauls. on dates unknow,t, but betwet:n 1 u March, 2U 12 and 2011. August. 2013 at Mongu, Sioma, Senanga, Livingstone and othe1 plac~~ u ,1k111,>WH in rh1; Rt'pltl.>lk of Z,1rn'bin, jointly .u,u whil:a acting togetht·1 w1tl1 1.llb~t µ c:t tall1!"l llllknown, prt:pa.rc:d nr en<lt:avoured ro \ I I carry out b,y unlEnvful means, the usurpation of rJ1c t".. Xecuti11e power of tJ1e Stat e In a n1aUc-:1 11t i)ofst.1 a puuHc ;ind general nHlun:. They I I • I I were each :,jClltc::u cd. J tn I() yea rs imprisonmt-nl with hw-d Jobour wit.b efl'cct from the date: of. nn·est. A fourth ptt rs tin ·who hnd bean jointly• J2. charged wltl\ the appellar11~. M1 MaHiye M:1f:!.alt•rl 1 WA~ U.lXfl.iltit-:d at In tbe cou1i. below,. the pnJS~<.;ut1on led cvido11ce frt::1m Lt!.. It wlLuus iscs while 1.hr thnie: appelli.i.nl~ i;uv,} :swu, u t'Yid,:ncc iu t l:Jeil" rcspc:ctiv1: behalveli. The> f"Vide nce given by 1!,c witnes~c~ for the prosecu1 l(')n, In thJs case. esta blished that on 12•11 August, 2U 13 . the 1 "' appellant took an oath of office ns Administrator-General of the all~edly independen t Sta ti" <Jf Barnts~land .1r1d that th1• 2 1 " ' 1;tnd ~r,l fl.pp~Uants r,1 ti•nded t he sweuring-iri-t;eremony. fi'n llowing Lhe S\vcaring-in nf tt,r I•• !iipflellant., celebratio11s by groups of p~ople we1' e reported in MQngu . . Senanga and Ka!abc1 district:; of Wes1ern Province.. In A11gust 1 2013, Nl'unbo I<a.bui (PW2), o.n air time vendor, saw a grou p of 50 to GO people in Mongu town. running along the road coming from l.i1n1. Ilunga to MQngu. They were s houting wiU1 u 101.1d I hati(;!T that Lozi-!and had IJt!Gn cut:. off from Zambia. They also carried I • • btutuc.:rs oni: of which proclaimed "8aroLsPfr.u td- }lapp!J and . Joyous lndepenc.ic·nce". The people were not armed or riotous but ,)ppeared J ' I • J3 • On 1su, Aup,L1s t , 2013 , Sofa l<abika (PW~). ~ polJcc officcw, who \V'JS olertrd to act 1viti('l:- m S cnanga te1wn and went there, S£1. W pt·onh.: wearing red bci ct s of the- 1ypc worn durii,g the Kuon-iboko cereToony They too we.re shouting in Lozi. L1sing a loud b~i lcr th~r "Borotselond iJ. i11dcipc11.rl~n.r Jr.nm Zuml?it'J ", "tJJ<' h~rJI! ynt rr1.(11•p,~n.dence", ·rt1ert' W/"re several b atH1c.rs as weU, so1ne of which re<1d ·' wzila.nd is Our.</'; "Ort:at da.<J for Barot.se people''; ''Go1Jem.rnenl nj Barotsaln.nd ;_..., 1v<!/,r.()1n1!"; ai1d "V,vr, l ,i1L! /1Jl't!f1'1ru/omho, 11wa /lfumba Mn,nbotwa". Agnm, the people were not armed or violent and normal b usiness and Govt:mment 01,crations c;;on tlnucd. Policc1 h ow1~vcr, appre.hcoc.kd ~ Otltt' oftho1;e people and !'ecuver~cl the. loud h,L"1e t :ind banneri:; used during the celebranou s. On 20111 All~LtSt, 20 13 Pol i<.:e led by Sen ior Superinten del'\l Leon Mwt1cm.ba Ngulube (PW7), commenced il'lvestigations during whic h Mt Masialeti's hm,.tse at Sion1a Sec1Jridary $(.;huol, where ht w, t~ !;;t11plQyed a~ a teai.:}wr, was raided ,and searched. ?'hey saw (:)!!t>!Jle sc:,unper away fro rn tht: house into the nearby bush and found a hurriedly a4a11doned brealefast inclicating ,thaL a. I least fr.iur pc\ople ltnd ueen i11 rl 1c: l 1ou~c. Video foota,ge .ihcl 11Hdtu t t:cordings were ·, ', • J4 H!t'll\11:!.l t!d fll1111 lhL' IJouse showu1i4 U1t.: 1,1 s.ppdlnn c tru<.ing rh,· nfllh 111 11f\1c•c• in th" pn•~<:nt:,~ of 1ilc. 2•" uud 3 .i appalls n ts. The ontb wus 111 I bt:!I<! tonn:,: I, J\fumha: Mombotwa, do 11crcby 1SWCnr that I w i lJ endeavour, t o the best oi m y abiliey to p rotect, d e fend and upltold t he constitution or the King4fom of Ba-rotscland as an i nviolable- Law o f the Land , and I th e- independence, sovereignty and terri t o rial p-romise to p r otec t integri ty of t:he Kingdom of Batotseland, an d r shall serve the ,peopte of Barotseland without discrimination and gi ve the r espect to th« :s overeign de Jure, Ngoaan a Kfng. So help me God. ll'ollowln~ t he oath of office, thll I i• appellant mo.de a speech in wblch he ~121 t:d thal the effe<j\ of the declantLtn,1 be had ,nadc W'S.$ thuf · 1 . Th ere was t o h e no exta terri torial opuatlon by Z-ambla l n Batotseland.; 2 . Zambia was to have no extra cenltorial rights over Barotseland; and 3. By fhe a ct of declaration , Zarnbia had no general pow(!r to pas$ legislation taking effect o utside its territory. For example , to punish crimes committed outside its realm. Other itmns fc,rund ln the h ouse it1duded ;;J. d ocu m ent titled Bato l'Sels.ncl E111aoc!ipation a11d l'{eetoration Or'cler - N1:11Jonril Con:.litul'ion Guide :20 L2 which for ense of refer(:nce we shall tt•rm as the 8arotselan<l C(IJISrilUt.iOl'I ; O d(J(;tlJnent d a ted 1011, December, 201 7 " •JIHtl.ining thr.: pn1vi$iona l CHl>ll)e t 111 lt\e 8arot:'1e lurid goverruntmr n . . ' . ,, J5 It<\ ter dated 11 '" D1·<:ember; 20 [ 2 uJleged ly w rittr-n hy the 1,1 £1 PP" llH nt In Iii:-. c·;1p,1c:itv it ,; Ad.mini:;fn.1t1')r (h:ncrnl to 0 11{' Rt. lion. Oliver l{. Ndl rmba atithnrising the tvttcr to find people to help "re-establish " rbe Barotsdttr\d Defence F'orc:te: thu 13tirotseland Defence Force Code of LOt'ldUtt, :JO Id; a <1ocu111e,1t on k•111n,"icf' ('1 11rt N;H 1onw Planrung; n compact disc (cd) containing I he (proposed) national anthenl and a wrltlen translation of it. Also found w~re bank. notes (po.per rnoncy) cle..cilgns (ea lkd n1upu) as well as che natim,al flag. Tllcl'C was al:;o ur\1lther le tter dated 10 ,t• Janunry. 2013 with the letterhend titled "Linyungandatnbo'' under the hand of the I JI appellant, who signed as \;l)airperson, to th(.' Catholic Commission for Peace .-,nd J1.,stict" hnploring the Jatto1 to spiritually i11tervenr a nd pray for rh<i Za1nbia PoH,e that the pG>licc realise thul 13arotseland wu~ a country separ,1,te frnm Zambia . The lnv1-:s1 igalion~ liJt'tlier l·e'1 poltce. TO Sic11ili, al~o tn Western r1·ovince, whert: • th~y recovered a, laptop from a person called Mashwelo. The laptop had soft copies of the materials found at Mssisleli's house in Sioma. Ftoll'I Mushwelo, p(Jlice lear n1. al>out ' ., . a 11uU1~r lapl(Jp uwned by Wamundila Mqkelaha,, (PW6) who \vai:; ·, J6 ·, I • Mtt$Jhwelo's cn-ownt'r of a C'fllt1J)fl ny called 1,. And.frcsb ll)itiiu..ivC$ lirnil(•d. Sirnila r t'ont~nt s.s 1n Masbwc:lo':i lnptop wus found there HS well, Police scut but a lc!t ts by ·wireless radio 1uess,iging n:garding the thn-<! npJ)ullants , On 5,1, December, 201 <I thL: three appellants were app rehended at a poliee oh eck-point in Mwa.ndi district manned by S1crgci1n t Valentine MLlgwag.va (PW8) and other polir.c officers encl were taken to Mong,.1 where eventually they were t'hargcd with the: subject offence. Subsequent,ly1 they were tried in the 'High Gnurt a.t K&l,we . At the close· nf the r.nsc fo1· th e prosc;cution the teamed LTlal jttc.lge fuur1c,i eacb appellant wiU-1 a case to answer and put him on his defence. In his deft:nue, the l "' appellant did not deny that he took the; e>t1 t Ii of ofl'ict~ r)r made t.hc. !lr,cech in lhe te1·1ns stated above. I !ls tlt!.feuc:e was sh11ply tha t he had not conm1itted any offence in Za1nbla whioh , a ccording lo his testimony, lhd not include 'Barotsehuid ar:d ~OLtg h.t lO Justify this position. He acknowled_ged the existence l"lt art orga11isatto,~ called L1n)llm'gan:dan1bo Wl1.ilh he said was ' fon:rted In 2 0 IIJ, l-k al!udi;d tu dissatisfaction by t he people (or Barotselnnd) un ·, J7 1u, rela tionship brtwt•1·n Zambi~ ltnd Btu-otselanu which led to meetings in ~rhich mctnbc·rs of the Linyungnndnmbo po.rt1d p«kd These m~etings culmin~tc,-d in. whin h e r:a.lkd the Convc:sntioi, nf' 1 he 13ttrots~ Natio11~1 Council (BNC) hdd betwcctl 26 111 otnd 27 1>1 M1lrd1 1•1 ttppe lla nt, was to determine the ''destii·iy of Barotseland" and that th~ Convention resolved that "Barot.se/c,n~ U1Q. S to determine for several n10nt.hs, people slarted calling hi. Jn aski11g when tht: resolur.loni:: would be hnplcn1cnted. He visited several distJ·Jct ·-Wutas " and co nfii n1ed tl1e people's view U1at the BNC Convent ion resolutions we.re not triviru matters. ft was nn tha t ha.s is that he a nd his un- .1ppellants committed lhernsetves "to thP. service uf the people qJ Bc1rotseland bJJ ta1~/,ig a uow bclfore Ood in Livin.gst<u te at ,Ice 3"; appellarrt'.is house·", He: ::;tatcd that h e took the oath as Adn1inistrtttor Ccnel"al ot' a politic~! o rganisation th,'lt wo14kl serve a longside th!"- • . l. Jtunga, King of Barotseland and !C1 pny allegia nce to U1e Liiungo. 111t:ir intention was to put 1n fJlaae an Pnt11·y r.hat ,.vo1-1ld lead ti) the I I arhicvoment nf their missjon. J8 The I ·' opp<'llant inilially denied having played any rok In the 1ualung t1f ma.lei lcds 01 porlicipa ung i11 .iciions preparatory to the rri1lisation of RA.rotsel('lnd's st~1tchood, b c:sid1•.-.: tsl<:ing th,• oath of o mce .,s Adrnirii:;trator~G <::nerfl I. U nd(' r c ross-exruninulron . bowf'ver. 11, ~ieveral preparato.ry 1:1cUviUes su1.:h as the creation of a trru.isitlonal Guvcrnmcnt ,n whkh (ht: 2nd ::ippel\ant was aJ locaterl responsibility fo r lht! :iµ,1 ic1.1ltu 1·~ portfolio. Th~ 3,u U[-lJJeUar,t was al~:o to wud, und~s the sa111e portfolio. He stated that the video of his oath taking was t.o be placed on digital versatile discs (dvdi.) and eds at a studio cc:1Hed Sakata. Security cards were designed. He admitted hearing about til e cdd>n1tion s and that they took place after he was swom-m. He, h,1wever, refe rred to bis modus operan di as being non-violent but tc, foflow !egal rcctrcs:3 to attain the objective of Barotseland statehood as a dvised by cli'l organisation called Unrepresented Natio ns ,u1d Peciple's Organisarion (UNPO). He st.atec.t further, that in this vdn, I I :,tt~mpts had b~:eri made lo institute s law suit at th«: International • Court of Jl-1sticc (!CJ) and that the 1natter had als0 been taken to the Alnt:.111 lfninn (Al l) He dict not say whn1 the outcon1es of 1.hese effuits w~1·e , ·, J9 Thr, 2"<1 £1ppc•lt11nt confinned that he atten<.111cl lh~ oath taking by c-onfirmed thnt tile> onth raking rc1~otcJi ng was taken to Sakata studio ({tll reproducllou). He reve::ived a phone enlJ while on hi:; way buck lo Mongu (fron1 the swc:qring-inl tlu1t 1ncn1bars of rht: I .inynngRndrimbo whn had been dunc:iqg in Kaoma wt'n:- being arrei;;ted, T-Ie also he.ird of the san1e in Mongu a.11d that people in Kalabo ce lebrated after sc~iltg the swearing-in vid<.:o }-),• de1, itd bcin.g rc.isponsibk: fnr lht ttems recovered by rolicc in the investigations whi<;h were prodt1r;cd as exhibits in coi.u'1 but stated th~t they were don~ by other pcopJ,, abroad and local Iv. He oonfinned 1hat lie was appnintcd (as ScC'rctary ~f . State for Agdculu.ue) o.ftet the swearing-in at Livingstone. He too did not recognise the jurisdiction exercised over him (in being arraigned before the courts of this country) "on account ofmy country Burutselcirtd". !le se.id tlia t h ~ w~,s t\ me,nber or th<; Lr1 tyung--ctndatn_bu which term be· 1ntcrpre::lcd tu 1rtt:an "sha/...u your • r1ci9hbou11 ' becausi: the Barotse people "had been asleep for a long ti"L< - I le Htlt:ndc:d ,neclings m cluding the BNC Convention which , I l ;t<.:<.:1.1rd1ng to him. resolved to r<!vr:rt Aa.rnrscland ro its fo1•111er stsnis '• -, Jl O IH <fbro the Barote.oland Agree.me11t of 1964 at1d th:.i.t a 30 day pti1'intl W{Ui t;l'"I \( • ()\l.t i.n 11lar.c. the GoVCl"1l1li Ill di 11:'ll'l\l~d~)l l ( l. Tbc 3"1 appc.llun t's defence ulso polntecl i•l a similar di.recttu11 a!. hib co-appt:llaut::. HI! stal,:tl U11:II 1h1: I·" app<"lb1nr Look oath (as /\dminisiri,11or-Gt:ncral or BHrott.elnnd) in hi~ (3".1 uppellant'S-) house in Livingstone whwh, according to hhn was pact of Barots~lancL Ht' also atrcnd!:'d t.he DNC n1eeu11g whust: purpose wa5 to chart a wa_y forward for Barotseland using legal and peaceful means al the ICJ. rre too belonged to the Ltt1)11Jnganrlainbo. All rhat was be.ing don1• wu~ wlthw BatotselSJJU aocl had nothing to do with Zambi,1, He pleaded lgnurance or the materials recovered by police in r.he Investigations,. He r1Jso stalt!d I h/11 I lie I w1 appdlanl was sworo in to enable hiw take t.hc:· lSsue to court. [-le heard that people celebrated after the swe.arlrlg in m t·\le 1 •1 appell~u-H . That summed blp the evidence a dduced in tht:: High Co11n , WHtten submlssi6ns were f1lecl 01! behalf of1,hc p~osccution and ' th~ 1lefence und Jhe learn ed trial judge took them into a(;coullt in his • jutlsmen~. In • th~ judgment', the teru-ned 'triul Judge no'ted the •existence or the 1964 BarQtsela nrl /\grc1.,ment regarding ~he position ' .. •, Jtl of Barolsclnnd wit hln indcpcndan.r . Noru1L·rn Rhodesil! .ind that this agreemeul waR s igned on 1 gu, ·rviay 19(,4 bt.>twcen then Prin1c MinistCTr of Northern Rhodesia - Kc11o nt11 David Kaunda the Litunga of Bssorscland at the ti1ne - Sil Mwu 11awina LcwHnika IIl and tht.> Duncan Snridys. 1'he learned Judge f()llk Judicial notice of the histortt.:.:tl f.\t;t tl11lt Zrun bia became inc1t:p~nde.nt on 24 111 Oct0ber. 1 t)f,<'I; thrll section l of the Zam bin Jr,d~>c::ndc•nce Act J 964 dccl;1n~d the territories which comprised Northern Rhodesia to cease Lo be a ProtectOrale and together became the independent Republic of z~1t1b1,i. l'•\.trther, that prior t,, lndependence in 1964 Ha rotsela.nci was an integtal pan of Northern Rhodesia in the British Admirnstr;<\Hcm of the ren-Hory. 'The learnec:I judge a lso referred to 11 rulLng un a comt1\U11katiOt1 by the Ngan1be::la uf Western Province and Others to the African Com1nissi.on on Human and Peoples' Rights in Wl licit the aas-e peri-~1Mi11g to alleged brc:uch or fhe Ba rotscland • Agn:ement was h e1d • tn b~ inadmissible. The lefu-t1ed judge aiso co nducted an on.line search on the lC,J website· a nd yielded no resu1r I I 1)i l'Hl. Y r.;1~e r errnining tri the- Garotseland Agreement. ibl' judge . ·. '• J12 •• • ihtC'rnntionnl forum U1ut LtIJfl£ll'l<:d on tht' ntsl' The tl'ial judge tJ1en set 01.1t ft oxn the pren1iaes that the "r,pcllants were- at a ll 1nntcria.l tim~s citizens of Zstnbio who were 1.1dvocati111, for a separnti;: Stace- k110W1) clS Baf'otsclancl which wol1ld cncomp~ss the Wesrern Provi11ce of the Republic of Zan1bia. Hc oottd. how~vcr, thut the appellants as:ic,rtcd that Barotsdand wms. nn tndc:pcndenL St.11·c from the Republic of Za1nbia anc.l as su ch they wc•rc non-Zatnbia.ns and in that context could not be charged by unolher <;1Juniry. The karncd jutlgc considered the clen1ents of the offence of T)·c~son~feiony under sectio11 45(b) of the Penal Code 45, /\ person is gullty of treason-fe.lony and shall be Uable to imprisonment for twenty years who- ". (b) prepares or endeavours to car,ry out by · unlawful inea-ps aoy cnterp.dse which usurps the executive power of the State in any matt er of both a public and a general nature. lie \qe1k in1 o a<;:count Article 1 oftbc applicable 1996 Constitution of Zambia which. arnongsl othc--r ,hings, cntrcnched ,thc indiyisibilfq• ~=t I I ,, • J13 Iii Where under any proclamation or law in the Baxotscland territory, any power, j1uisdiction or autborit.y is at the commencement of this order exercised by the l>rcsident. ::.imilar or 1Utalogous power, j urisdiction or authorfty shall be c,re,-ci.>,e,J by U,e /\J.uw.ihil,alu r•Ot:ueral uu.ri"cg l no1sil1v11, in force The judge then made a finding, trucing into account. the Provincial and District Bon.ndaries Act whicJ.1 provides for the division of tbc Rep11blic of Zs.i11'bia into provinces and dtst.rir.t11 which lnolude • Western rind Sotllher.n Provinces, th€tl Moagu, Limulunga, Senang:~, Siomn1 K rili1 hn .a nd L,ivi·11gf,tcine (where the va!tou:s ocew•1 t.:tjCtlS took place) were at ail material urnca .l.t1tegra t parts of tile. untr.nry Stai:e or 7. AJmbi.:i. rt!'! ensJu-ined in the Co11stll'1.1tiu11 o[ Zarul.tla . J le a lso agree<il With lht: ,;ubrnission by t bc prnsccul'ion that by taking t he Oqth. whloh was b1·oadcast to fhe general publi c, r,he l •' appellau,t assumed. rnr a1Jl11orlty vested ln hitr1 undei th!:! 13arotse!and constiturinn ns Ad.mi11'i~1 rutur-Geueral of Barotselaod. a pait or the Repul)llc 01 . . . ' Za1Hbia, 1 hereby t-aki11g the p lace or a Qove1111nent office!' wtticl..i amo\111ted to carrying uut ab un te:rpn{;t which u~urpecl tt,e e.~cutive ·, • t t powe.r of!hc Stare byuntawfu! n,eaos contraiy ta Article 33(2) 1)f\ ht 1996 CQnstitution.of Zambia wbi1>-h p1·ovided that- J14 3~. 12 1 The execatJ ve powers of the Republic 9f Zamb.ia shall V·e~t in the President and, subject to ale· other provisions of th'is Constitution, sha. JI bl! el{ercised by ltitn either tllrectly or through officers subordinate to him. l I 1111 rlw·y we1T rq1wl 1~o rttclp:111ts In rha conn11Issl<1n of the offence by V1J'I uc ,if section 22 n! the Penal Code wh lob -sl,ttes : 22. When two or more persons form a coai.m-0n intention to prosecute an wuawful purpose in conjnnctioil with obe another, e.nd in the vrosecution olsuch purpose an offence is oommitted of such a nature that it s com.mission was a probable conseq11ence of the prosecutiot1 or suah pl.t.rpvse, each o·r them .ls deemed to 'have co·mmitted the offence. 'Pb~ hmr.ncd j'udgc was of' 'Lht": vi~w I h ell the demeanour of th~ n r~cllr~nts- ttnd th(; evidence they gavl: sh/)W(:d that- t·h~y w<;re a.ltcrna 1iv,.i defence of mhnakc of fact tJn the basia tht•1l ii did nol iiri;;t i11 I.his n1uuc:::r beeattst' lhe appellants' beliefs that ·eru1otse1and was ;,\ n111 it>t1 or S t:ate ~epai·at<! from Zarnbio c:ani;iot be; stJid to have bc~t!n 1reasonably or hone.~tly bcld . TlJe Learned Jll.dge. convicted rbe: three appellartts ctf thl! offerice of'l'reasoa-f<.:lony b.s chargea and 'sen tenced t:uc h ont- ol tht:m l.o IO yc:a rS i.mpri:,mnm1.:nt 1 n:. it we re. J15 • rnll nMl- QR. QtmlLOJi~ 11'he ieamcd txla1juclge mi swre<:tea btmsdfboth in law and fact when he erroneously fonnd tlte avpcnantS- wJth a case to answef and placeJ them on defence wli c n t6ere was uu evidence to support the c:liargc ~aln~t t bern ,-t the close oftbe pTu:;ecu tion•s case. GllOOND ·rwo Tile learned ttialjudge ert'ed and misdirected biln,selfboth ill law 1a nd faot) when he convioted the appellants for the offe nce of Treason· Felony in absence of' proof beyond reasonable doubt that they had prepared ,or endeavoured to carry out by unlawful l'Jlt!3JlS an enterprist! wfoch Us11t,ps the executive powers of the State in any matter a.f botll a public and a general nalUJ"e, p ROUNQ THREE The learned trial judge erred antl misdirected himself both in law and faot when he convicted the appellants for the subject offen.c:e when in fact t.lie MJ.eged pt'eparatory activ'itles were .t1.of Undttfaken bJ' tbe appellants but by other people unknown. fil!Qillffi FOU.~ The learned trial judge ened and misdirected hlmself both in l.i.w 11.nd fact when he held that ttie L~l appellant took the position of a Government officer and 'declared nimse-11 the. Administrat'cir-Genei:al ot a part of the Republic of Zambia when there was no evidence idenlifyiug ,;11.1.c b. a n office of Administrator-General 11. Ue~edly taken in. the 2amblan Government. GROUND FIVE The 1eamed trl~I jildge e.uNl in l:\1111 ai:,~ fa.ct by failiu_g to taki: in,to 'account i!lear evtd.e.nce fl:om Appellant 1 1 AppeUaiat' 2 and Prosecution. J16 Witnesses 2 and 3 sho\Ving tlU\t Ba(()tseland a n..(! Western Province of the ~epµblic of Zambia a re not one and th e same reading to n misdii:cction of fact and law. GROUND SIX TJtc learned tfial judge misdirected himse1f in law and (act by making a ftnding: that Al, f'4 an.d A3 usurped lhe e)l.ecul:ive power of the State when there was no evidence to support usurpation. (S1c;) Heads of argument were filed on bt1hslf uf thi? ·sppcfl ants wh kh $pok~ tn t·h,, grounds of appeal. Heads of argu11H~Nt, in respon-st:, were lik~Witit! likll on behulf of the l'espondent to w111c:h a repiy w~s tllt.d <1n be huJf of the a.pp0llants . We n1ust mention here tf 1al n o grounds of afJpeo. J ,111tl bead$' of argurn1·nr had bec11 filed by or on behalf of the ~ppellanLs b. Y lhe dHLe of Lhe uppt:ul htaring. Mr Kar.halUl gave r~a~on:;, to <='-'Plain tht failure,. which we .accer>tt'l<l ·ond rhe grounds of ~peat a11d the· heads of argument were. r.hereafter fi le<l -ln l'he m a11 n~r in whic.:h we h,1tl. instn.1cted i11ch.1di11g those lll responst! l,y tht" pt lJSCC' LI tlrJt, . Thi' viaw we fom1cd after read ing the grounds Qf appctal as well • as tl 1~ appellan~s· beads of ar gun1enr /$ rha.t I l 1c.-re ls , 1 signifi-ctu11 ampunr of overlap {lnd repetitiveness. fi'or rea8ons, of orrlerlil1ess and ncce~s~IY IJrcvity, we p rop()se tel con f.lder ;)ncl resolve lhe issuclsJ '. '• '• J17 raised In r.ach ground ·1:;: we. g(, :1hm!-: <'Xt:C~>t for ground~ rwo, \hree ,\nl'f !'Ii.'- whkh were rcspnridt~d to a~ <>r'IP bv the lc•/;lrncd Chief S1.:1Le Advocate lor the state save when'! w,~ J1ncl U1at lht' 1,;sue has a lready utir:11 dealt "vith in :i previous ground . \Ve would W<c lo state al tJui-. juncnu-t! that ollr 111andat.: in LltJt'i appeal is to dctcnninu the questir>11 whether the offcnr.c which the l'lppdLants were chaFgt:d with unde r U1c Penal Code w .. u; t'::ltubli>.iht:d. rt will not be within the [Hllvjew of rJus jurlgrnc.,:nt to erttcrttiin considerations w hc thr.r or not the appd lants n rc 1:ntitlerl to their claim for o suµarn tc: existence: from Zr1111bia unch:r lht: nntiu11 or: Ba rotscl1111d , Mr l<acr1.i.ku a.nd Mr Chav~lt1 i11 ~ rguing th~ first gro~ut(I or appeal sub1nitted that the evidence had not disclosed t he essential ingredients of th(" offence of Trens-on-fe lony against them which coun:.el listed as being- " I, prepares oJI' endeavours; 2. unlawful • meat ls us1Jrp s the execullv~power of I h~ St~te; 3. any malf.tr of both a rubJlc aod r.eneral nature'', 1· Lcun1cd counsel presented tncl'r srgu1nents in res-peer of rJH? I - (. J li!;ted ingrcdjcnts to the following effect: the appellaul~ cliJ n<,1 ' t · i J18 • • • , partldpt~lt· in th,• celcbratipns st·cn hy PW'1 ancl PW!I i11 Mn11gu aru I SC::1'-lntiH (n1.1t Siorn:t us s1il;n1ill<-d by 1~;11 ti l•d Cv~JJi~;<•I) whi('h II~ tou ted as preparoto1)' activities; the exhibits produced in the: case. ruid narticu lltrly thi- onrh recording. do not csiablish the ing'l"<"dicn1 of u11[E1wf11l us11rr,111io11 nf i-xc<•11tiv1• power: th(·rt• Wf;!!!I oo cvirknt't" from the prosecution that the appellants -supplanted the provincia. J or district administration of the Zambia(nl Government which. in ou1· view. would h,1v11 adQ1'essecl t)1e lasr ir1grec;Jic.1t11 in the lc:irn~l Counsel's list; in any case, that the appellants did 1101 belong t!l 7..ambin b11 t Wli' re c-itiz~ns of Bn1·otsel.ancl. Coun!ld referred to section 291(1) of the Crimin.al Procedure Code (CPC) a_nd the Ci1:3CS of Penias Tembo v The People • and The People v Antifellow Chigaba.t and submitled th.at lh1s was a proper casi:- to stop at the dose t)f the evidcni~c for the I>rosecutlon becau~t lhe ~vicli:nc:e to support the charge had 1,01 been cstnbllshed and thst no ev1dr.11ce, l<:d by rhe i ppellants afterwards ca.i i n:rnedy th<o • defic1cn<.:. V In th~ pro:;ecution eviden<--e- , The rt'.spon<lenl ·~ ((:l;ponsc 110 the submissions Ln the first groL111d of ~ppt:al was that the: lc:arned trinl judge (lid not rrr in Jaw J19 111 tilc1 ,.v11cn ltf' f<>lil'ld tile appell:lflt$ with a cos<' to answer hr~us~ tt 11; prusccu I 1(111 ·, r.!Vrdt: rn,ct a t 111t: do~,· of thc11 ca.o.;e <·~tfJ blishcd a 1i n k het\veen the 1Jffence and ·tht'-appellants. LE·arncd Chief State Advocatt"" was of the: view tl1at th1· ingrt:dieots uf the offence to be proved artc· thr following· 1. rhc.; appdlants ~,cting iogc tti\!r 1,11~djoinrly with oth<"r'J unknown; 2. 111"1::parecl or endl:.'avoLt_red to carry out: 3 . by unlawful ru1;mi-s; 4. any 1'nterprise; 5. which usurps the executive power of Hw SLa,le in u11y rnutter of bnU1 a put.ilk and general naLu1't!. [twas submitted that t'hc; evidential burden (at tl1is stage of the prnoecdings) WflS nnc of n primR facic nature. H was pointed ouL 1n tht! light of the foregoing, ll1al Lhe appellants all belonged to nn ,,rganizntion culled Linyungunclumbo who:;e mi~:;ion was to !lpearhead ,the interest s or Barotseland as a separate territory; the l " f.lppellant was sworn-in in the presence of the 211(i and 3"1 appellants t•lld guvc E•n inuugura. J speech us Administrator-Oener~l of IJarplselancJ whi<~"1 ,straddles parts, of the Souther{\, Central, North• western and Wc•stern Provinces of the Republic of Za.tnbia and declared ffat hen,:efor-rh }3arots elantl wa.s an i11dc:pendi;nl lerdtory , ru1d chat U,,! Govr.rnn1r1H of 7,n1nr1lll h~d uo µc,wur ov~1 th e sajd '' ', J20 H! rTit<rry; I ht: 0:11 h i,irlJ tile: !>pt:t<.:h whkh w1:n: h1t11'ldcast. via video and tlli.i inl~rnet c:;11lsed j1.1'1i lntio11 in s~vrral towt1~ of Wa:=; tern l"rovinc<.:: ~,ne1wards, Kt'Vc:rnl 1~ems pn::p.arur.ory to S1ub •. lwoJ Wc:.rt"· re:·cuvc-red S< •cin t1cc1ng, l l was :sLLIJmitted that S.l'I analysI:s of Ll1e fo1•egoing evide11ce t{stnblished rl1 ai. the appellanJs were part of a gr.ouru>f people engaged in tl1e u1'llawfuJ eutcrpnse of subverting or uudennlning I he: authority of the Zambian State; ths.t it was not lawfu l for the appell~nts to prepare ·a oonstirution, bank notes, an anthtm, n provisional c:t,biru.:.t; un tu·n1y for LJai-otsetand when it i.s part or th1: uniteuy St.it!: or C:li1t.1bia; antl ih11 IJ 1e I •1 uppellallt Lt1 lake 0<1tl1 tts Aduuuistralor Guneral for Bsrotse]and when tb~ C9nsl'itn1lon mandates t11c Republican President of'Zrunloia: to administer the terr•itory ter-ttted by ~he appellanL~ as the Kingdom ofDarotselaud. J. L wa.s submlned that • th iB cond1,.1ct fr![ w(r.hin the prqvi":;;i9ns of section 45(bl nf the: Penal • Code; that the '-'PPella.nts · pre~e11ce i'n the oath taking video found • • • l.ug~1t.her with U1e other instruments linked thern to l'hP. off<~1,11c; t.h11,t • • t ' tbc 1nosec1.1tJon hncl., the, efore, dii:;<.:harged tht cluty of t:!:ltl-t.1Jli$hing a '. ' I •• • • fH 1u1a fac:1Cc! case against tht: i:tppc- Ua n ts, It wn s Rlso :Submitted thal l'lJUU':. IJ'Y to IJ111 ur~'lJUlJ; nts by lcf1n11:rl cn,rn.sd rr,r rh,· appellanls, ,ht: substance Df lhu oath cs toblishcd iJJat I he l ; 1 a ppellant was r)ol dec:clas i.ng his ail~giancc to fhc Lir11 ngn; it was o dec laration of Eli\ ro tae ln 11d u s iu1 i11dcf11m1<knt tcrri1ory whose con a tituLiun itt1 wtis In hold., defend and prote1.:L. Wi:! must 1nention h<:rt' Uiut tbt (:V1d(:11ce rJf the p rosecution was requ11•c:d to address ingredients .of the offon c<.: charged i.tJ1d for tl,js purpose we adopt those set ot.1t by th~ learned Chief Slate J\.r:lvocale whi(:b we fmd LtJ be more in ucx·ord with the- offence ~11cte1 section 45(b) of the Penal Code, We agree with the lea rn eo C h ief' Stule Arlvt1oe tt• t(Ja1 .i t 1 he c;lnse tif .the. evide:uct- for• Uie prosecuaion, tlie consjdera.tio11 whether theue is suffidem; ~vioc;iencc adduc~d to require the accused to make a defeuc·e is dett~rn1l!1~t.l on prlma/a.cia bs.eis. !LJ thr case of 'Jlhe People v The Principal Resident Magistrate e8 parte, Faustine Kabwe and Aaron CllunguJ, we said that the ph rase • • • • f ''µrfrnafacie" rs a Lalln expression bearing the dictionary 111eanings 1011 its first appearance; by tlrst instance; a.t tlrst sight; at fir~t vkw; ' • t ' ' ' . ', /t,.,: f:i ,•c•; lht• ftrt;l nu:,\b ; a nd Lro p1 .1 freab trupr<·~s1cnt". Wi:; tbe11 is. There js no req_'uire.ment under section 206 .anO l>V: extension, under s ection 291- of the-Crimi nal Procedure C~de thnt the Courl m ust give re asons for- acquitting an accused person; thnt It must merely appear to the Court. 'I'he co nverse, 'tJu,~.fute,, must also 'tie tt'l.le fhat w:here U.e f'.on T't fjnili< nn '1Cr.i1,.,;Rrl w it h .,. ,..,.,.,. t n -~n""'"", lt mu i<t tnP.rAl.1( a ppe ar to the Cour,t that a case bas been made out against .!M accused. (Wo,fls i1t pun'l1!.hes is2dt1<:d, ttnde.rlinil\S :<UJJl,licd for emj.,hasisl s. A finding of a case to answer 1s based on the Court's fecllpg or impressions. anti ap11earance 6! g,e eyj,~~nc~. Above t\U, t h~ fh1<lillg of prima facie case is not a fi11al verdict. w t111~ E:r1gUsh casr: of Miller v Minister of Pensions1 i t ·wt.:- hc;ld lliat- A prime. fade case does not mean proving each and every il\gredient. of the offence charged, lf t h21e Is evidence to prove. one of the. ch iments then thore is a pri.ma !acje case." J1'u 1'thcr, In I h !! case ill Mwewa Murono v Tbe People~. westat.ed th~l :-:i:ct ,01, 206 of th~ CPC wh ich reli:iLe~ to l.rla~ 1a th~ S uborclh1ate Court should be read logelher wkh se,tion 291 ( I l of the CPC wbich rbor-· • The application of Seotio.ns 206 and 291. of the Criminal Prooedur~ Code Chaptet 113 of dle Law~ o-f zambia doe's n ot depend od Ute defence mAkilig a 110 cas~ to a,11sw¢r subtl\ission. T he Court has or its own mo~l>'tl to consider whet her a ptlma fao.ie oase has been ma-de out. •, JZ3 /1.s submirt1:d by the lcnrncn Chict' Sintr: Ad vocate Im· ~b~ rcspoodcnl •. t.lic .l:vid cnce hHd e:;LnlJlisliecl that the l" appell,1111 h,1J m.k~n oath of office .ts Admit1i:.;trt1tor-GenPr.1 l foi- Barotselm1d. 'J'h,1rc was c\1idcuce of other activities which wcr:e prepHr;i!<,ry 't<J tlie rt'aliuitinn of stat~hood for Durotsel..ind sucb .is lhe n1ee\t i1'1g~ pJ'ior t n and incltiding rhe BNC Convention In whlch the ~ppdlants rmrticip1,1tcd. Matcrral was discovered in Mas.iuleti's hottse wl1ich ndale::d lo Btwotselnncl's attain.mcnt of statehQod . The p[ac ~ at whJc.:h t he various occurrences took p lace. ase within the Western Province of Zambia wbicb. including Livingstone, is a patt of the za,nbi~ lan dmass. Wi thout explanation the oath taking and t·he m;,lerials1 a ll happening within lhe b01.1ndarles of Zarnbia 1nu st surely have x;ven an app,: cJ.rance or :iJnpression. to the: tri.il Judge that s01nething i.111lawC1..1l 1n relatio n to Zanibia was beillg t. C.>r1t~mp lated 0r was about lo happen ~tnd , therefor~, tlw,t there wn:s :sulJsLance iJJ the charge alleged a.gainRl the a ppella.nls. 'l'he loW<U' (;OW:t was accordir1~l,v • • I l!n.t.i.cle<l lu del~tmiine that a prirnafacie case had been tnadt.! out and prupurly p ui M,c~ :a ppellant::! t,n I hc:u- dt~fenct!. Wl:. f. Lt:refure, fiuw 110- , ' ruerlt tu th<! fu::;l @·ound of appl:l;ll aud clisuuss· u... J24 • ' . l.11 gr0Lu11.l 1wo the ee11tnd .:u:-gumen l wu!:i Li;iul the;:ire wn::; 110 proof thul t lit! tippc•ltants e:i..rricd out an u n l uwful c! nt.erpris<i which usuirpr!d thr 45(b) of rJH: Penal Code. It was sub1nitted to the eft'ec1 rhn1 the oath l.ak t!r1 I. Jy Lbc I " ;.ippclta11l ws.s inc:apablt:. of l>C'ing c nl'rl1·Ged 1 .ns we uude.rstoou Counscd ; tlial a rticle 3.2 of t he Barc>rs~lat1d constltuth,11 refe rred to by rbe. lean1ed trial ju~e was of no consequnnce becnus~ il was not th,: law in force in Zar;nbia; anu rt1al the-State> had fatled to liuk rile appellants to the rt>st of the exhibits iu tl1e ca:.e, wWd..1 as we un<.le.rstoud lhe argument, should h ave supported t.be allegation that the appella nts were. engaged in an unlawful enterprise.. G round thret• raised the issl\c of the appellants ' lnvolvetnenr. ()r rtithc r h~uk ol' i r1vntvemc;n1· in !.\fly activities prepa ra tory to the attainment of Bar0tseland 1ndept!ou~ncc::. Th~ aspect relating to the I t t t t appeUnnts ' particip ation in the celebrations was already mentiont1d 1n the s11bn1ission in ground one above. lr wa::., I I ) I ltowt!Vtlr , also I :iu Gm1Ued ll 1a I i 1· w R:,; nnt· p roved tbat I.be a ppellru1t.s made or f25 parhclpnlt!d In rnuking rh;.: 1naierlal$ exhlb1ted in lhe case::. We were o.ppellnnts in t1\eir d ~fe11c~ .ind the pdn<:iplc- in the rl'!~l' nf S aluwe m a v Th e Pe op le '' thal 1 lttw hud r1~1 ideu about (1l1e n1nking of) the 1•1".l 1i l>it:; .. Tl) t: principtr, rctf1>1•t1i><l ro hold~ r!Hll- If the accus e d's case is reaso nably poi,s ible; althougn pot 11robable , then a .reason <!.ble doubt e l'(is ts , and tne p:co s~e,ution c annot be s aid to have disch a rge d it s burden ·Of l)Toof. rt \vas subrnittcd, (n grot1n(I s ix. thot th<" or1th laken by tl1 ~ I •1 appellant ,,;as lawful undtir the Kingdo1T1 of Dt\rotSt'lltulJ laws1 tlr-.11 thf' 1 •1 appcllanr hnd every ngh1 to tStl<c- , J,,; JJtitb which had nothing ftl do wlth z~unbia; thHt th!.' 01'\th did not 111'1'<:c t an~, offic~ in Z,1mbia: rll~t it Ji11d 1HJlh if1g to du wirh Zumbia but e verything tP do with the: kingdom of 13arotseland whose complai.i1on1 s h ould have been the King and not the Gove r nr11e11t of Zwnbiu. The rt>sponden t's respo11ee to grounds twc,, threc·.and six was to ' the effect Lh at based on th~ same matters' alluded to in 'the first ground, j, w;is est:siblishr:d that the (lppellc1nts and other5 ur, k nown endeavoured rn· und~rtook to usurp the exr•cut ive p dwers of the Sta l'e lt w;;1;; :.rgt..1cd that t.hc. ~PJJt.' llants d icJ 41ot have lo .t<:ll.(ally ~uppl~ni ·, J26 ', snmeonf! from 1h~ (')ffi<'(· under the ofTe11c:c In seetion 45(b) nf tll~ Penal Code which requires the pt'OSC<' lltton 10 011ly show thut the:, a ppellanrn had prepared or cndeavoureJ 1c, usurp e.xccutive power 'rh::u tJ,c facts eetsbliah that the &ppeUants encl oU,crs unkpflwn pi-epart>d to subvert the executive power of the Stute: thut if that wen: not the <·asc, what then was the effoc1 (purpose, in our view) of ti. JI tltat which thr- i1ppcllru11s clid l,\nd nl l !ht-" instruments 1..but were prtjparc<l? h w11s subruitted to lht• effect thut if the appelh1nt i<' erti.vitics had not been c hecked in time, r.hey would have inevitably l~d to the secession of Barotse.land fron, 1:be. Republic of Zambia in un uu.lawru l rn:,n 1Hir ,lnd thereby bring d1;.i1,)S l.u L11c nation . It was especially submitted to lhc effect that the appellants ,vere all present at the taki11g of r.he oathj tI,al· based on the intii!ntions cyf the 13NC' 1 o secede:: rtmn Zambia which they were p ll1'1 of, the appellaril:8 <.:unnol t.llfsl~ltH:e· Lhen1(;e;:lves froni k11owledgt' of ,ht· e:d1ibi ls recover~d in tlih; case, parLic}uJa rly lhaL in ordi:r to run u • f • • • country - Ba.rotseland,, th.ey would n eecl a currency (the m1.1pu) fo1 there to be trade (in the• 1nodem times); the kingdon, would not bt~ ' • ~ • cof.:ily idenr if1ed 1H tless it h;\(l 1\ t,onstitut iort, ;i n11tion,,1 ,uHh~,n ,u1u J27 ', "th.lg. '1nc.rt!l1n~ ·. 1!iut ii 1t1adc· tu, Mt:11:;c fo1 lht: appellants t0 d islnnc-:l: themselves rrn111 t ltt: c~hlbits whk:h Wt!re found ln the same 1,l~cc: nl the r;ume tinw, ro piuaohrasa , he subn1ission. A:; to rh,· 111111dnP, of th<· exhlbitti, ii w...i:s concedt::'.d t har the MJ)pdla11ts may nol h1>1ve done cvc-1ything bearing in mind thc-ir c,viucnce that there were many people invotv<:rf who were pl~.wing dlffcrcnt i·oles. It was su1>n1ittcd, however, th at th~ uppell.ant.. S ho.d :.1 ~otnrno,1 pur pose with nthe:rs unkl1own in the joint cntc•rprise to St!Cede Barotse land whic h led the trial court to invoke section 22 of t l\c Penal Code . l1 was submitted in conduding thc urgurri.ents undt:r t !test: grounds that the evidence was ove1"\¥helJnj11g on the marten; Ii 14-rl' j ll . We have considered the sub111issioos. Our view of section 45(b) or tile Penal Code is that it criminalises conduct that is preparato ry nr nny cndc.ivoLir~ .1iu1etl i.tl 1,;arrying out h j1 unltlwt\1l 111e4i.trS .1.11 c:1·1terprise whkh u aurps the execlltivt: p owc,· of the· State in a"Qy matter of both u public and a general enterprise, [t is, therefore, misleading ,for Mr Kachaka to s\ibmil th~t there should. be actual usurpatlon of Ille cxcc;utive J1owei• bl!yont1 mere pu:par.ation . 11ut ·, JZ8 • cv1!.n If the fc.,u,:gui1,1g conclusion was not corn:c-1 i1 would i:itill r.lflnrl tr. I reason th Ht it ls Abund21111iy dr-llr th}1,I· tJw mtt h of office- wa:, .assu1ned under th~ provisions of the Barotsc: lu ncl constitutio11 whi<.:h iu effect usurped the cxc;r.utiv<: powe1· of t hr S tntc. As observed by t h i· learned trial judge, tht' i;xc-cul·ive µl>w,•r of Lh1• State in Z:1mbiu vests in the President . By Alticlc 3.2 of the Barotse1and constitL1\11~n, t h11t power was purported to· vest in the Administ rator· Genet'al uvec a part of-Za1nbia whi(·h hs alreDdy Sl1bje.c1 to t hi: ~xec1.ttivc pnwi:rs of the President of t he Republic of Zambia. What shc,ul<l not be lost sight of is t hat the Barotseland constitution w u:,, In th~ eye.<i of its b1:1wfactors, a Ieiill m rtte ;;itld l,1.wfi. Jl inst1'U1ne ttt lly whlch the natkn, ,11' Barotse1and was to be g ove rnt!d. 'fhis is e villc:nt i'ron, the elabortHe prc'parations that were put. ion place and leading up to th e swearinR lt1 ,,J Lhe 1•1 •• q.ipelbu1t u.nd th~ celebfatlo:ns Lh:lt followed. To quot\:! the l " a ppellant, Lhe issue of t'~lH~JJisb.ing the st.1tehood of BarotsC'land w~1. no t a trivia l one . . Based 01J 1 he foregoin,g co11siderations 1 U1e 1st appeliant cu ,11101 he heard to say that t he oath h e took was of no consequence:, and • ·• I l I h111 ii w.,s n nwrl• declaration of allegionr:t1 rn l'he Litunga, b1:caust." •• • rhr £3a rotsclnn<l c:onstitution waR not legitin1at~. IL i:; :-;1.1fficier\l that the appellants ;111d their confederates believed in it. In fact. th<! fact rlmt what w;1 ~ l>t· ing done wa& un lawful in the cy~s of ZambLul li:1,w is \Vhat fc,1 ms Lh e basis uf U1c o ffence charged. It is our rno$icl,; red J)Oflition tl1 >\ t ,grouF1di; two, Uirt't: .i n tl s i)< 1,.-quaUy have no merit and we dii;mii;:; them. Grou11d fuur ~gues that Lhe lrial judge s hould not have held t.bst rhe 1 •' a ppellant assum<!d the position of a G.overrunent officier ~is t...dJninistrator-Ge~1eral without establishing that s1.1ch £11 position ,:xisted in the Zambian Government, as we unders tood the ground Ti wus submitl1;d that the: only office known r-1s the Administrator - General in Zambia is undt-r th~ Ministry o f Justice and there \11.i~ nv evidence called fron1 that office Uult the powers of that office had been us-urped. H was Counsels view ti1al il was not a criminal offence 11'1 lhhi c<n1ntry for ~1 pt•rson to tak1• 1Jath but dq nothi.ng in furth era.ncc of it} that th e ] "t app ellant ntt!rel.v dt~dicated hims~lf to !sP.l'Ving) tbe people nf Barotst1land \Vhich cannot aniou u l to th~ offl'!tice of Treason-fel"ny. )30 • '!'he U!'ll'f ruspous<,: on beh:1lf of the rc:spontl{;nr to th is grot I r\d of tipl)eal WllS to rJ1c effect rhnt ihr oath taken bv the J '' appellant t1nd h h, innugun.tl :SlJ~<ich tells ll all. That the !Jnding by the lowr:r c.ourt that the appeU~u1t took thi..: po8itio11 of u Govern1nent oflln·r when hi! look <1alh as Aclrr1inistrulor-Gcncn,I of B.trotseland w:1::. 1111L a misdirection because it was based on the oath. 'l'herefore, that the> c·oun IJelow cannot be foll lted for that concltJsioli. We W<"n:1 urged to cHsmiss I his ground of appeal a& ,vdl. We have <1.gain considcrc·d t bc submissions Jn ground 4 i1r the ~ppeal. We .are of the position that the -subswnce of the o~th tt1ken hy the I •t a.pr1~tra111 is clear. He swor<! tel uphold 1 h<~ c()nstiH1tic1n of Bar1;>tseland in the capacity of Administrator-General wbich is sn office, in fa~t the executive;; ofiin:, in gove_rnment according lo that c;onstitutioo. The implication of the said oath is t hat the l s,-appellant ru1d his cabtnt!t (whic:h includes his co-appellant~) were now ve-~r.ed with execullve p,,wers lo run a part ofZamllta and that the Zainbian • • • t ' Onvernmenr luvl no controJ over the a reo 1hey term as the Na.lion of' R,lrotseland one! lhat Western PrcJvi11ce of Ztunbia and some: other pi.u r-s of other provinces had sec~ded from thi• Republic of Znn1bio '• ' J31 ' .. ; .. wh~n 111 l»c:t not . Th~t't! is clt:c.1rly tl<1 rn1:1·it in thit: g1 ound a n d Wt: The iss\1t' r~i!;~(I in ground live related t~, Lile rel.ation1:1hip htLWet•n 8arOlSdH11l<l ,1n<i tbc We'.$fOr1 1 Plsovinoe of Zn111 bia. Wh~l we gte:111,t;:(! from I h,• ~ub mi~!iions on this issu e is t hat LiaH,?sela ud 1:11 1d \Vestern Province accord,ing to the appeUa11ts' counsd , :\re not one 1ir1d the sam t• a nd, t herefor!!. U1al it wa:, a ulisdirection on Uu:: part of Ute lcan1~d rrhll Judge to 1'll~1.kc a f1ncli11g U1at th<:: oath taken in reference to Ba}·ot,selund was an oath taken in referenct< to Western Provinct: uf Zan1 bic1 . The response· was rh1,1i rt has :unply been established that t h t: u re;1:;. daimt:d a $ lielrmgfng to Barotselarid irt fact b elong to Zambia Further, that it does not matter in whk h pl,ace ,the· oat b was l-aken or t1i3.t the acts s h0uld l,~ it1 publiG. Thu, R~a.i.n is ,1 non- issue and we ure sut"priscd llrn.t it was even framt:d as a' ground ol ap peal . It is inconceivuble tha t co'Lu\sel for th,:, appella nts as an officer or the court, and who sworC' to uphold tht! Co'nstJtuHon ot' Zambia when takmg oath of offic~ of advocate, could .. J32 , • ' • th<! appellants ru1cl Lucir confo:dcnHcs claim a.~ thr N,1lit>n uf 13arOt.$c la11cl .nri- wholly part i,f the l<t·public: of Zarnbia ns by 1.i\)., establiahcd . We a rc not rtwarc of (111y Stutc nr Nation called Barot~eland lhnt i.:xists sepnrv\cly fron1 the• l<e Pttblic of Zambfa. There is ddt1 rly 11r1 me rit in t his grnunci und Wf! rli:;;n1i:-s 1t. 'l'h(· r,•s1_1lt is that all grounds of aµ peal fail. The sentence of lO yenrs imprisonment has however, enujo\h! olir a ttention, ·p11 i s ts in vie,:w of I he d1sp1>si110n of the appdl:u1 l!'! towurds the offence generally. It has clearly been one of Aelt righteous nt!s~ in what t h ey have been 1nv.olved in which still teflee~ even in the phrasing of thefr firlh ground of appeal. We clo not llghtly interfere with the sentence of a trial court unless such sente11cc i$ tof.'llly inodequate such t hat it come~ to 11~ with a seni'le of s h ock. While! w~ u ppreciate that the tdal col. In took inLO .1ccount that the offence was a serious one in arrlvlng at the· sentence of JO years, our vltw is that, beadng iJ'l mind: (i) the se1f-dghteous disposition of the . . ' . appellants; .(ii) the potential which such self- righteou s di$position has lo destabilise the Nallon; and (iii) that p a rliament h as prescribed i i I n mH.x:i111un1 senteiaoe of 20 ycru--s ituprisonn1en1 for such offen tc., ·I h e i . ' scntttict! nf HJ years imprisonment is tolally !W inadequate to punish 'fhr1tcfon:,, in acconJ:uH'l' with th <! pnwcr vested ln us under S cctto11 15 (4) of lhe Supr~rue Court uf Zan1bia Act, we hclVe decided to int.el't'r!n· Wil l1 it. w, ~t~I (1$ide the !.lw'1 senter1cc !)J' tO y~:lT'~ bnpti!!OtHtll!ttL We ~\JIJ~Lllute a sentence of I 5 years in1priso nm,ent wlth }\;.it <l lal>ow . 'l'he t'lnal ot1r.cnn1e i$ 1 h ,H 1hts appeal is di,smissed. ·•···· ··· ······ ····· ··········· ···· ···· E,N. C. MVYOVWE SUPREME COURT JUDGE ·······i·:M·.·HAfi!!i;; .... SUPREME C OURT JUDG& • • I ......... ~:·~;.~ .;:;; ....... ' SUPREME COURT JUDGE J34