FULL STORY 18.11.2010 Kasuto versus Supreme Court By: JANA-MARI SMITH IN an unprecedented legal move, a Namibian lawyer and his client are challenging a Supreme Court judgement handed down in November. What makes the development more bizarre is a private visit to the home of Chief Justice Peter Shivute by two former politicians in a failed attempt to involve the Chief Justice in a post-judgement dispute. In a ?notice of irregularity? Ephraim Kasuto, who represented Malaia Joses Amukutuwa in a Supreme Court dispute over the sale of uranium prospecting licences to an Australian mining company, is now challenging the Supreme Court verdict. The Namibian is informed that one Supreme Court judge described the challenge as ?perplexing? in view of the fact that the Namibian Constitution holds Supreme Court judgements as final and binding, without the option to appeal or review the judgements. Kasuto and his client, Amukutuwa, filed the ?notice of irregularity? with the Supreme Court following a judgement against them in early November. The legal saga is based on a case in which Metals Namibia and Metals Australia won their appeal against Amukutuwa, who sued the mining companies for allegedly conning him into selling two mining exploration licences in the Erongo Region. The Supreme Court judgement concluded that the sale of the licences was valid and saddled Amukutuwa with the legal costs, estimated at approximately N$2 million. The night-time visit to the house of Chief Justice Peter Shivute on November 9 backfired badly for Kasuto, who was implicated by the visitors when they allegedly informed Chief Justice Shivute that he, and his client, had advised them to ?talk to the Chief Justice?. The informal visit cost Kasuto a meeting with the Chief Justice, who ?was furious? at the suggestion that he would consider involving himself, The Namibian has established. KASUTO FACES MISCONDUCT The increasingly desperate attempts by Amukutuwa and his legal advisors to have the Supreme Court judgement reversed or reviewed have led to the lodging of a formal complaint of ?serious professional misconduct? against Kasuto with the Law Society of Namibia. The complaint sent to the Law Society said that Kasuto ?acted in a way which reflects upon the dignity and status of the Supreme Court and is accordingly contemptuous of it?. The complaint of misconduct furthermore argues that Kasuto?s actions is an obstruction of justice ?by preventing the implementation? of the Supreme Court decision. His attempts to challenge the judgement is described as ?reckless disregard of the correct legal position ...? As a result of Kasuto and his client?s battle against the Supreme Court judgement, a senior advocate, who formed part of Amaktuwa?s legal team during the Supreme Court proceedings, officially distanced himself from the actions KASUTO IN THE COLD In a letter to the Supreme Court on November 10, the senior Windhoek advocate criticised Kasuko?s attempts to ?seek to arrange an audience with you [Chief Justice Peter Shivute] for purposes of lodging an objection to the judgement given ...? The advocate wrote that he wished to ?place on record that I distance myself, in terms that I cannot emphasise strongly enough, from the above action and objection. The course taken by [Amakutuwa] was not discussed with, nor approved by me?. The advocate concluded by saying that ?the Namibian Supreme Court has always maintained impeccable standards of integrity and impartiality and the hearing of the above matter was no exception to this proud tradition?. He placed on record ?that I regret that a party who was represented by me saw it fit to cast aspersions upon the impeccable integrity? of the Supreme Court and the judges who ruled in the case. Kasuto denied yesterday that he had advised the two elderly former politicians to visit the Chief Justice?s house at night. Kasuto admitted that the ?notice of irregularity? is ?not a normal notice? and was done for ?the attention of the Chief Justice? He furthermore said that he and his legal team are still ?deciding what the next legal steps should be?. Kasuto claims that he has ?good reasons? to tackle a Supreme Court judgement, and added that the judgement was ?based on points not raised? during the trial in the High Court or in the Supreme Court. A source close to the proceedings said the fact that Namibia?s Constitution does not provide any legal means to appeal, review or request a retrial is ?well known to Kasuto as a senior legal practitioner?. Kasuto however said yesterday that the article in the Constitution that prohibits steps against a Supreme Court judgement is ?a question of interpretation?. Prior to the notice filed with the Supreme Court, Kasuto informed the Ministry of Mines and Energy shortly after the Supreme Court judgement that ?due to special circumstances relating? to the judgement ?there are strong grounds to challenge the judgement?. Kasuto informed the Ministry on behalf of his client he ?will take the matter up with the Chief Justice as well as the SADC Tribunal?. In response, the Ministry, which is legally required to set in motion the Supreme Court ruling, informed Metals Australia that the Ministry ?will not proceed with the processing? of the licences ?pending the outcome of the appeal?. In the complaint of professional conduct letter to the Law Society, it is argued that Kasuto?s letter to the minister is a misrepresentation of the ?correct legal position to the [Minister of Mines and Energy Isak Katali] in an attempt and in bad faith to obstruct? the final decision by the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the ministry has reversed its decision, and informed Metals Australia that given a lack of appeal or review lodged by Kasuto on behalf of Amakutuwa, the ministry is proceeding with the renewal of the Metals Australia mining licences, which was put on hold for the past two years while litigation was continuing. The Supreme Court has instructed Kasuto to urgently provide the Supreme Court with the relevant legal basis on which he bases his ?notice of irregularity?.
MLS Price at posting:
2.6¢ Sentiment: ST Buy Disclosure: Held