Lawyer Alexious Kamangila Criticizes Judicial Service Commission’s Response to Corruption Allegations

By Burnett Munthali

Lawyer Alexious Kamangila has expressed strong disapproval of the Judicial Service Commission’s (JSC) response to recent allegations of corruption within the judiciary, particularly in relation to allegations against Justice Kennan Manda and Magistrate Mangeana.

In a Facebook post, Kamangila criticized the JSC for releasing its statement on these serious allegations solely through newspapers, which he believes limits public access and transparency. He further raised concerns about the JSC’s decision to impose a strict 7-day deadline for the submission of evidence or complaints, calling it unrealistic and impractical, especially for those who may have difficulty gathering evidence or traveling to Lilongwe within the given time frame.

Kamangila elaborated in an interview with Times Group, pointing out that the alleged offenses against Justice Manda have reportedly spanned several years, making it even more difficult for concerned citizens to provide adequate documentation or present their cases within such a short period. He questioned the fairness and practicality of a seven-day window, given the complexity and the historical nature of the allegations.

“The JSC’s approach seems more like a ‘Kangaroo Court’, a mock trial rather than a legitimate judicial process,” Kamangila stated. “It is dishonest for the Commission to present this as if there are no outstanding complaints against Manda, as if this is an isolated issue.” He further stressed that the public deserves more transparency and better systems for reporting corruption, rather than being pressured by short timelines and limited access to information.

The JSC’s notice, issued on October 31, requested credible information or evidence regarding the allegations against Justice Manda and Magistrate Mangeana, giving a tight deadline for submissions. Kamangila’s comments reflect growing dissatisfaction with how the Commission is handling the situation, raising questions about its commitment to addressing corruption within the judiciary in a transparent and accessible manner.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *