UTM witness Ndasauka ignites legal battle: ConCourt rejects revised sworn statement
A legal feud ensued in the Constitutional Court in Lilongwe when hearing of the landmark presidential poll result challenge case resumed as Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) I can lawyers challenged a revised sworn statement which implicates President Peter Mutharika as winner of the electoral fraud.
Lawyer Bright Theu representing first petitioner, UTM president Saulos Chilima, conceded in the court that the party legal team overlooked the need to request court permission for Darlington Ndasauka to use the revised sworn statement.
Judge Mike Tembo has since ordered that the revised sworn statement should not be allowed to be used in the case.
He said no permission was sought and MEC lawyers had already cross examined Ndasauka without reference to the document.
Meanwhile, President Mutharika’s lawyer, Frank Mbeta, has resumed cross-examining Ndasauka focused on discrediting the witness and his testimony.
Mbeta is pushing hard to demonstrate that some errors made during computation of presidential election results could actually have advantaged candidates such as second petitioner, Malawi Congress Party (MCP) president Lazarus Chakwera and not necessarily President Mutharika.
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
If the correction was advantaging someone, whether Peter or Lazarus, then it’s correct to say the elections were not fair.
Kugwa nano poyerayera.
thats not an issue we going to comply with court
UTM put your house in order please. Its becoming embarrassing listening to this Ndasauka. Mukuchedwetsa zinthu aliyense akudziwa kuti umboni uli ndi MCP osati za nkhambakamwa yayi
MEC and APM Lawyers are the best as far as this case is concerned.They have proved to the Court that use of tipex,alterations,duplicate sheets did not change valid votes.The petitioners Ambwita.
Who asked you to assess the capacities and or capabilities of the lawyers? Secondly who made the analysis and or gave you this conclusion Noxy? Ntchenche yopupuluma Noxy inapsyindidwa ndi manyi!! Chonde osathamangila kukatela pa nyansi zisanagwe pansi mudzavulalaaaaaaaaaaa……………….. Do you think the 5 judges’s IQs are shallow like you have demonstrated about yours? Is the case about “changing valid votes” as you put it? Koma mulanduwu unaumvetsa iweyoooooooooo? Bwinotu bwinoooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!
I concur with u 101% and mbali imeneyi kuli khang’ana zokha zokha. In fact, lawyers for UTM and MCP know the outcome koma akuchita pretend kuti atha kuwina. The point is that akufuna kufufuta nawo ndalama zawozo bwino bwino.
If errors had advantaged MCP candidate should we still say the electoral process was fair. What about those who were disadvantaged by these errors? Shameless lawyers.
but Akulu AGENDA…………, it it right to say waba ndi UJE pamene zinthuzo zili ndi uje winayo????? Shameless lawyers are the ones who fall short of equipping the witnesses with little or no evidence at all.
Tell us who won the case in December after all is set and done!