Yesterday, 22nd September, 2025, a new Auditor General was sworn in. This confirms that the person who was sworn in to occupy the position had not been replaced by anyone prior to the swearing in of a new Auditor General. A controversy still looms that a government should always avoid. There is an Auditor General who is still claiming not to have vacated office and there is a new Auditor General who has been sworn in to occupy the office. The only authority that could settle the matter is the Supreme Court.
Section 5 subsection (2) of the Constitution states:
“The court may make orders and give directions as it may consider appropriate for giving effect, or enabling effect to be given, to such a declaration and any person to whom any order or direction is addressed shall duly obey and carry out the terms of the order or direction.”
It is therefore clear that the Constitution has provided answers as to how such matters should be settled.
Section 158 of the constitution states very clearly the terms and conditions for the appointment and assumption of office of an Auditor General and the terms and conditions that should lead to his or her vacation of the office. It is the Supreme Court that has original jurisdiction in interpreting the provisions of the Constitution. If the case does indeed proceed to court, it will constitute a landmark case for the Republic.
