Frank Mbeta's intervention in a case blocking parliamentary committees raises questions about his role as chief legal advisor.
Attorney General Frank Mbeta has joined court proceedings concerning an injunction that halted the formation of 12 parliamentary committees. These committees were established to investigate statutory bodies. The injunction was initially obtained by a private citizen, Austin Mseka, but the Attorney General's entry into the case has drawn criticism.
Legal analyst Peter Makossah, writing in The Daily Times, argues that Mbeta's involvement risks undermining the perception of impartiality. Makossah contends that the Attorney General, appointed by the executive but expected to offer detached legal advice, should not appear to take sides in disputes involving Parliament's oversight functions.
Makossah further cautioned that parliamentary committees are for scrutiny and investigation, not for determining guilt, a role reserved for the courts. He suggested that Parliament risks turning inquiries into mere theater if it oversteps these boundaries, and that the Attorney General's role is to advise the government and protect constitutional governance, not act as a private lawyer for officeholders.
Why it mattersThe Attorney General's involvement in a dispute over parliamentary oversight committees affects the balance of power between the executive and legislature, impacting governance.
Read in the ASJ desk →