In the 1976 case of Liswaniso v The People, the Zambian Supreme Court held that illegally obtained evidence is admissible as long as it is relevant. Since then, unsuccessful attempts have been made to convince the Supreme Court and the High Court to reconsider this position, especially when the evidence in question has been obtained in violation of a right in the Bill of Rights. Recent decisions from the Supreme Court show that the court is unlikely to change its position on this issue. In this article, the author suggests ways in which the Supreme Court could relax, without necessarily overruling, its rule in the Liswaniso when dealing with evidence obtained through violating human rights.
