A legal row has erupted over who should represent Speaker of Parliament Sameer Suleman and the National Assembly in a High Court case challenging plans to establish 12 parliamentary committees.
Nicholls & Brookes, the law firm appointed by the Parliamentary Service Commission to represent the Speaker and Parliament, has asked the High Court to set aside Attorney General Frank Mbeta’s notice of change of legal practitioners and bar him from acting for the two defendants.
The move follows Mbeta’s filing on Tuesday in which he said he was taking over the matter from private lawyer Bright Theu, arguing that the case concerns Parliament as an arm of government and therefore falls within his mandate as the government’s principal legal adviser.
But Nicholls & Brookes says it has neither been discharged nor replaced and argues that the Attorney General has no authority or instructions from the Speaker and the National Assembly to act on their behalf.
The firm further claims Mbeta may be conflicted, arguing that his court submissions appear to support the same position being advanced by the claimant, Austin Mkoka.
Mkoka is challenging the creation of 12 parliamentary committees established to investigate alleged corruption and governance issues in public institutions.
In September, the High Court granted him leave to seek judicial review and halted the process pending a final determination.
In submissions filed on 19 October, Mbeta argues that the Speaker acted unlawfully in establishing the committees without involving the President, whom he says forms part of Parliament under the Constitution.
The court has given Mkoka’s lawyer seven days to respond to the Attorney General’s filings.
Before the substance of the case is determined, the court may first have to decide who is entitled to represent the Speaker and the National Assembly.
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
Follow us in Twitter