GOVERNMENT says it has no hand in the escape of Petauke Central Member of Parliament Emmanuel Jay Banda.

This is after his mother, Grace Banda made allegations against Government, demanding it to bring back her son.

However, Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security Jack Mwiimbu said Government is not involved and has advised Mrs Banda to appeal to her son to surrender himself to the State.

“The Government of the Republic of Zambia through the Ministry of Home Affairs and Internal Security has noted that one Mrs Grace Banda, the mother of fugitive Petauke Central Member of Parliament Emmanuel Jay Banda did Address the media on Monday, Second of September, 2024.

“Among several issues she raised, she appealed to Government to stop detaining sisters and friends to Hon Banda, confiscating their phones and destroying their buildings,” he said.

Mr Mwiimbu said the remarks were very unfortunate and largely misdirected.

“Whie she is right to say that her son was in lawful custody, she is not right to insinuate that Government is keeping her son elsewhere. We would like to respectfully remind her that her son, Honourable Emmanuel Jay Banda did actually escape from lawful custody.

“It should be put on record that Government has no hand in the escape from lawful custody of Hon Emmanuel Jay Banda,” he said.

Mr Mwiimbu advised Mrs Banda to make an appeal to her son to surrender himself to the State.

(Mwebantu, Friday,  September 6th, 2024)

FORMER press aide in the Chiluba administration Richard Sakala has sued the State demanding US$5million compensation over malicious prosecution and detention over a case which occurred over 20 years ago.
Mr Sakala wants the court to rule that he deserves to be paid consequential damages for the period of detention before and after conviction, a period of five years less remission, amounting to the sum of US$5 million.

He wants an order that the criminal prosecution on him and subsequent conviction by the magistrate’s court, on March 5, 2004, and any ensuing decisions on appeal in the said proceedings was illegal.

Further, he seeks an order that the actions of the Republican President, the late Levy Mwanawasa at the time, to override the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) was illegal.

It is alleged that the President, then, Levy Mwanawasa, directed the withdrawal of the private prosecutor for the taskforce on corruption, Mr Mutembo Nchito, from prosecuting the criminal case against Mr Sakala.

The petitioner further alleges that the President then reinstated Mr Nchito to the criminal case against him (Mr Sakala), decisions he says should be declared illegal for violating the provisions of the Constitution.

Mr Sakala submits before the Constitutional Court that about April 17, 2002, he was arrested by the Anti-Corruption Commission and charged with four abuse of authority counts.
Subsequent to the arrest, the petitioner was released on police bond but was told to appear before a magistrate on April 24, 2002.
“On April 23, 2002 , the then DPP Mukelabai Mukelabai, in exercise of his constitutional powers, granted consent for the prosecution of the petitioner for three counts of abuse of authority but entered a nollie prosequi on one charge of abuse of authority and discontinued the count”.

Mr Sakala submits that on August 7, 2002, while on bail pending trial, he was arrested and detained at PHI police post by the Task Force on Corruption set under the ACC.
He says eight days later, without appearing in court, the dealing magistrate Faides Hamaundu transferred him to Kamwala remand prison where he remained incarcerated for the entire duration of his trial and subsequent imprisonment.

Mr Sakala submits that the DPP directed the private prosecutor for the taskforce on corruption Mr Nchito to withdraw from prosecuting the criminal case against him.
Aggrieved with the DPP’s decision to direct withdrawal of the private prosecutor, Mr Mwanawasa was alerted about the development.

“On December 16, 2003, in a letter to the executive chairman of the Taskforce, President Mwanawasa did override the decision of the DPP to direct the withdrawal of the private prosecutor for the taskforce on corruption Mr Mutembo from prosecuting the criminal case against Mr Sakala”.

The petitioner says despite these illegalities and irregularities, the criminal proceedings went ahead at the instance of the taskforce.

On March 5, 2004, the petitioner was convicted on all six charges and sentenced to a cumulative term of 11 years with hard labour of which he served three and a half years in prison which was upheld on appeal.
“The petitioner served five years imposed less remission for good conduct”.

(Mwebantu, Friday, September 6th, 2024)

FORMER Kabushi lawmaker Bowman Lusambo has filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the Economic and Financial Crimes Court (EFCC) to preside over his criminal case, arguing that the five months’ time frame to hear the case has expired.

Mr Lusambo’s lawyer Likando Kalaluka, told a magistrate that the financial crimes court can no longer preside over the matter because the five months timeframe to determine the case, as prescribed by law, expired.

This is in a case Lusambo, 45, and his wife Nancy are charged with 10 counts of possession of property suspected to be proceeds of crime, conspiracy to defraud and tax evasions.

In July this year, Lusaka magistrate Faides Hamaundu found the accused with a case to answer and placed them on defence.

But when the case came up yesterday, Mr Kalaluka, quoting Rule 3(1) not the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) EFCC Rules, said the court had lost its power to hear the case.

The lawyer submitted that the Rules under the EFCC provides that the court shall hear and determine a matter within five months from the date on which plea is taken.

“We were concerned about the jurisdiction of the court. The prosecution informed the court that this matter commenced in April 2024. I assumed that that is the correct position and I proceeded to apply for extension of time to another 45 days”.

“However, upon interrogating my clients, the accused informed me that they did not take plea in April 2024,” Mr Kalaluka said.

He said a charge sheet he got from the accuse was dated about 2023 or possibly 2022, which implies that plea was taken in 2022 or 2023 and not in April 2024 as was submitted by the prosecution team.

“You will note that according to Rule 3(1), this matter was supposed to be determined within five months from the date on which plea was taken. If plea was taken in 2022 or 2023, then the five months period in which to determine the matter lapsed. And this honourable court may no longer be clothed with jurisdiction to hear this matter,” Mr Kakaluka said.

But Anti-Corruption Commission senior legal and prosecutions officer Daniel Ngwira said at the last sitting, time was computed and what led to the computation was an interlocutory application by the defence.

“After the computation of time, this court made an order extending the time [for 45 days] within which these proceedings must be determined”.

Mr Ngwira said the defence had submitted that on August 25, 2024, when they [defence] made an application to extend time, the five months had already lapsed.

He said consequently, the defence had “clearly” been “caught up in their own web”.

Mr Ngwira also contended that the court had not lost jurisdiction and that section 37 of CAP 2 provides for power to extend time to hear the case.

He prayed that the court should dismiss the defence’s application.

Ruling will be made this Friday.

(Mwebantu, Thursday,  September 5th, 2024)