By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

odies. It is basic structure of a democratic constitution that state power is dividedand distributed between three state pillars. These are the executive, vested withexecutive power; the Legislature vested with legislature power, and the Judicaturevested with judicial powers. This is clearly so stated under Article 4 of theconstitution. This basic structure is essential to any democratic constitution andcannot be changed or abridged while retaining the democratic nature of theconstitution. It follow therefore that wherever the constitution establishes or permitsthe establishment of any other institution or body with executive or legislative orjudicial power, such institution or body is meant to function not in lieu of or inderogation of those three central pillars of the state, but only in aid of and subordinateto those pillars. It follows therefore that since our constitution is democratic, anypurported ousters of jurisdiction of the ordinary courts to deal with any justifiabledispute isUnconstitutional. What can properly be done wherever need arises to conferadjudicative jurisdiction on bodies other than the court, is to provide for finality ofadjudication, such as by appeal or review to a superior court, such as the high court orcourt of appeal.Let us skip over number 4 which is the concluding ground of the whole appeal. Weshall deal with it late. For now, we turn to ground number 5. this ground relates tothat part of the judgment of the learned trial judge, where she states:It is reverse discrimination to confiscate the petitioners deemed right of occupancyand reallocate the same to some other needy persons because by doing so thepetitioners are deprived of their right own land upon which they depend for alivelihood which was why they acquired it back in 1943.86