The New Congress Party (NCP) president Peter Chanda clarifies that according to the Constitutional Court eligibility case judgement ,the issue of being sworn in twice can not be interpreted alone without considering the definition of the term of office.
Speaking on Pan Africa Radio’s People’s Debate programme , president Peter Chanda explains that when the matter of whether the President Edgar Lungu is eligible to Stand in 2021 came before the Constitutional Court ,two questions were asked .
” Firstly did the President serve a term of office from January 20th 2015 to August 2016 and secondly , was he sworn in twice ? ” he says .
The NCP leader says , the Constitutional Court Judges defined the term of office as a period of 3 years and above. And as such the 1 year and 6 months that President Lungu served in office does not constitute a term of office.
The Opposition Leader states that , the Constitutional Court Judges explained that the question , was the President sworn in twice can not be interpreted in isolation but goes in tandem with the question did he serve a term in office .
” The answer that the President did not serve a term in office makes the question was he sworn in twice not to hold water .” says president Chanda.
He claims that the nomination form circulating on social media with a question were you sworn in twice , was for the 1996 general elections , which was repealed from the nomination form when the 2016 Constitution was amended .
Further president Peter Chanda says , the Leader of the UPND is on record of being aware that President Lungu did not serve a term in office. As he was quoted in the Daily Mail Newspaper in 2016 , warning President Lungu that because he did not serve a term in office , he would not get his gratuity should he loss the 2016 elections.So it is hypocrisy of the highest order to change now.
New Congress Party ,