THE Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has called on the Judiciary to provide guidance on the status of applications and cases that could not be filed within the prescribed period due to the three-day closure of the courts. LAZ president Arnold Kaluba said the Judiciary should provide clear guidance on how such matters should be […] The post LAZ demands clarity on cases affected by three-day court closure first appeared on Mwebantu .
THE Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has called on the Judiciary to provide guidance on the status of applications and cases that could not be filed within the prescribed period due to the three-day closure of the courts.
LAZ president Arnold Kaluba said the Judiciary should provide clear guidance on how such matters should be treated, particularly those affected by the interruption of judicial services.
Speaking at a media briefing, Mr Kaluba said the reopening of the courts today does not, by itself, resolve the serious issues arising from the three-day interruption of access to judicial services.
He said the Association has, over the last couple of days, made frantic efforts to engage the Judiciary and obtain clarity on the circumstances surrounding the closure.
“We sought to understand the reasons for the closure, its scope and duration, the authority pursuant to which it was effected and, importantly, what measures, if any, were put in place by the Judiciary to ensure continued access to justice for persons whose rights and legal remedies required urgent judicial intervention.
“Regrettably, we have not received a meaningful and comprehensive explanation commensurate with the circumstances,” he said.
Mr Kaluba, who was flanked by other LAZ members, said the Association has taken note of a public statement from State House indicating that the Executive did not sanction or direct the closure of the courts.
“At this stage, we have no reason to doubt that credible assertion. Our immediate concern, however, is the effect of the closure on litigants and legal practitioners generally.
“For three days, access to the courts and registries was interrupted. During that period, there was no comprehensive and generally accessible alternative mechanism communicated to court users for dealing with urgent applications, filings and procedural deadlines. The consequences of this interruption could be significant,” he said.
Mr Kaluba called on the Judiciary to issue, without further delay, clear and authoritative directions on how all filings, applications and deadlines affected by the closure will be treated.
“There are accused persons, for example, who may have required bail during that period. There are persons who may have required urgent protection from unlawful detention or other violations of their rights. There are survivors of gender-based violence (GBV) who may have required protection orders from the courts. There are litigants requiring urgent injunctions. In addition, there are businesses and individuals whose property or contractual interests may have required immediate protection and judicial attention,” he said.
Mr Kaluba said where security concerns arise, the response must be proportionate and, as far as reasonably possible, preserve access to essential judicial services.
He said security can not and should not become a blanket justification for leaving people without a meaningful avenue to approach the courts.
“If circumstances require the physical closure of court premises, there must be alternative arrangements for urgent matters and essential filings alike.
“Finally, this experience has exposed the need for a clear institutional framework for maintaining access to justice during periods when physical access to court premises may be disrupted. Such a framework should provide clear procedures for urgent applications, filings, procedural deadlines and communication with court users,” he said.
(Mwebantu, Thursday, 27th August, 2026)
