Friday, April 27, 2007



This discussion addresses U.S. copyright issues of concern to those who post to or own email lists or host web pages. It also deals with situations where someone might want to forward or archive another's email posting or to copy material from another's web page.

Copyright gives authors, artists and others the right to exclude others from using their works. Federal rights arise automatically when a protectable work has been fixed in a tangible medium such as a floppy disk or hard drive. A poem or picture is as much protected on a disk as on a piece of paper or canvas.

Once a work has been fixed, suits may be brought only in federal, not state, courts. Foreign copyright owners need not register first, but U.S. owners must. Notice is not required. Still, promptly registering works provide legal advantages -- as does providing notice. These matters, and basic limits to copyright protection, are explained below.

Limits to Copyright

Copyright is the right to exclude, not to publish.
Copyright does not give its owners the right to sell or distribute, for example, libelous email messages. Also, of course, works that are obscene or invade another's rights of privacy or publicity are not publishable just because they happen to be covered by copyright.

Basic limits to copyright.

Although email messages and web pages may enjoy copyright protection, rights are subject to several fundamental limits. For example, only expression is protected, not facts or ideas. Also, later works that merely happen to be very similar (or even identical) to earlier works do not infringe if they were, in fact, independently created. Sources of general information on those topics are listed below.

Fair use.
Fair use is one of the most important, and least clear cut, limits to copyright. It permits some use of others' works even without approval. But when? Words like "fair" or "reasonable" cannot be precisely defined, but here are a few benchmarks.

Uses that advance public interests such as criticism, education or scholarship are favored -- particularly if little of another's work is copied. Uses that generate income or interfere with a copyright owner's income are not. Fairness also means crediting original artists or authors. (A teacher who copied, without credit, much of another's course materials was found to infringe.)

Commercial uses of another's work are also disfavored. For example, anyone who uses, without explicit permission, others' work to suggest that they endorse some commercial product is asking for trouble! Yet, not all commercial uses are forbidden. Most magazines and newspapers are operated for profit; that they are not automatically precluded from fair use has been made clear by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Licenses implied in fact.

Fair use allows limited uses of another's work without approval, but other uses may be approved by implication. For example, when a message is posted to a public email list, both forwarding and archiving seem to be impliedly allowed. It is reasonable to assume that such liberties are okay if not explicitly forbidden. However, when forwarding, archiving or, say, using part of a prior message to respond to an earlier message, be careful not to change the original meaning. No one impliedly authorizes another to attribute to them an embarrassing (or worse) message they did not write!

One web site confidently asserts that all list owners must approve before email can be forwarded. Yet, absent rules governing particular lists, I am aware of no legal basis for it. Why would the power of approval be implicitly given to list owners? Beyond that, few who post to public lists would object if their messages are forwarded to others apt to be interested.

In the same vein, it seems that few authors would object to having messages archived. That serves the interests of list members who may want to revisit topics addressed earlier. Indeed, most would prefer archives to seeing old topics rehashed -- why one often sees lists of frequently asked questions (FAQs), with answers.

Can people revoke implied permission once granted? Circumstances allowing that seem rare. Courts are, at best, reluctant to allow someone to impose a difficult burden on others. Email authors should be careful. Inadvertent messages could be removed from archives, but list owners -- particularly if they are not paid to maintain the list -- may have other things to do than correct members' mistakes. Worse, it may well be impossible to recall inadvertent postings after distribution.

Express Licenses -- Put it on the table!
To address some issues, one web author posts this amusing notice:
WARNING: I reserve the right to use any email you send to me as either a testimonial of how great this page is, or as an (rare) example of the stupid things people send to me via email. If you do not want your email to be used in such a manner, mark it confidential.... That seems reasonable; many email copyright problems could be avoided if list owners would broadcast, at least on initial subscription, a similar notice.

A brief sample appears below. List owners who care to use it are given permission, but please do not regard it as legal advice -- much less a fool-proof way to avoid copyright or other problems.

Members who post to this list retain their copyright but give a non-exclusive license to others to forward any message they post. They also give the list owner the right to archive or approve the archiving of list messages. **All other uses of messages posted to this list requires permission of their authors.** Special situations.
Email lists are exceedingly diverse. Consider, for example, a prostate cancer listserv with a welcome message that provided in part:
Now that you have subscribed, you are encouraged to send a note introducing yourself.... If your concern is about a prostate cancer diagnosis, also include your PSA blood test result, Gleason score, and cancer stage. .... If you have deleted or missed messages these can be found by accessing the archives.... [It lists several archives.] Each subscriber to that list (as well as many others) should long ponder the wisdom of having personal medical information publicly archived. For example, it could end up in the hands of employers or others who might use it for unintended purposes. When information can be misused, it certainly should not be sent to a public list.

Private lists.
"Private" lists are possible. All who sign up might expressedly agree, say, not to forward list messages. Also, list messages could be archived anonymously, if at all, or access could be limited by use of passwords.

Private lists should have few "fair use" problems; permission to use others' posts should be limited mostly by what they agreed to when joining, not by copyright law.


Authors' Rights

Although web pages and email messages are protected as soon as created, copyright registration is needed before U.S. owners can bring suit. Also, prompt registration provides remedies that make lawsuits affordable. Statutory damages of $150,000 (or more, and attorney fees) for willful infringement can be obtained if published works are registered within three months, or unpublished works are registered before they are infringed.

Registration costs only $45, and simple application forms with basic instructions are available from the Copyright Office -- TX still appears to be the best choice. Yet, it would be prohibitively expensive for prolific authors or artists to register individual items other than in the context of existing disputes. Their options much improve when multiple works can be registered as a collection.

** Web pages.
The entire contents of a web site no more require multiple registrations than a book with many chapters and numerous illustrations -- or a CD with text and music, still and animated graphics, and software. Copyright Office Circular 66 contains a brief discussion. However, the following could mislead those unfamiliar with copyright (fee updated):
Revisions and updates
Many works transmitted online are revised or updated frequently. For individual works, however, there is no blanket registration available to cover revisions published on multiple dates. A revised version for each daily revision may be registered separately.... A separate application and $[45] filing fee would be required for each.... While new text isn't covered by prior registrations, it is difficult to see why a court would allow someone to get away with copying a page of mostly registered content merely because it contains a few new sentences or other changes!

** Email.
If a list owner wants to register threaded list contents, that should be possible -- particularly if copyright has been assigned by members. The main thing that seems unclear is how much time could be spanned by a single registration. Given that "prompt" registration means within three months of "publication", that period makes sense.

The situation for email authors is much more ambiguous. First, group registration of several periodical contributions by a single author is possible, but combining email posts would require liberal interpretation of the term "periodical." Alternatively, email authors might register their "unpublished" collections, but that presents a different problem: Are messages to "public" lists "published" for all purposes, or might they be regarded as "unpublished" for registration purposes? Perhaps because no one has tried to register, the Copyright Office seems to have so far posted no information specific to that.

Copyright notice is not required in the U.S. For many years, however, that was not true. Notice will rebut lingering notions that works published without notice can be used by others without restriction and reduce infringers' ability to claim that their use was innocent.

** Web pages.
Again, web pages are simpler. Although a formal notice is not required, it is best to provide a notice such as appears at the bottom of this page.

** Email.
Notice on individual email messages (if blanket notice is not provided, say, in a welcome message) may also be useful. Something as straight-forward as "Please do not forward this message without permission" should be legally adequate as well as honored by most recipients. It is hard to see much advantage to traditional notices.


Links and Frames: Caveats

Links and frames present problems that seem unique to the internet. While typical links to others' sites are unlikely to cause copyright problems under present law, several caveats are warranted.

First, if one directly links to content that would normally be framed elsewhere, its owners are apt to object. There is little law directly on point because most parties involved in such disputes have settled. Still, if a linking page surrounds other's material with its own ads, cuts out another's ads or makes it appear that the linking site is the source of the linked material, trouble is likely. It is difficult to argue that otherwise implied permission to link could be reasonably expected under such circumstances.

Second, consider situations where linked material infringes another's copyright. Ordinarily, a copyright holder would act only against the directly infringing page; others would be unaware of the dispute. However, where direct infringers are, say, beyond the reach of local courts, and particularly where a site owner actively encourages use of an offending page, there is a solid basis for protest. Unless copyright infringement has been actively encouraged, however, prompt removal of offending links should minimize risk of suit.

Third, while most web owners would complain about copying, some may complain about linking when it burdens their servers or, in the case of images, because it does not credit them. If that information is not posted, it is best to ask the owner. Still, no one should copy, even from sites that urge it without considering whether site owners hold copyright.

Finally, copyright is not the sole legal basis for objection. Anyone who makes derogatory references to others (or their sites, products or services), however it is done, invites trouble.


User's Risks -- The Bottom Line

Those who copy others' text are ever more easily found with search engines. Titles, markers and the like may also enable owners to locate improper copies of sounds or images.

Copyright law precludes most uses of others' works without explicit or implied permission. Because some uses are okay, people often ask which uses are okay. Such questions often miss the point. The most important risk is not of liability, it is of suit.

Consider graphics for example. Those who use a relatively small amount of another's work -- if not copied in detail -- may face small risk. Still, it is much better to work from scratch. Things represented to be in the public domain may not be. People looking for graphics have an alternative -- commercial clip art sold for such uses. Unlike freeware picked up on the web, it should also have warranties against infringement.

Litigation is expensive. People concerned about, say, the nuances of fair use must not become so entangled in legal details that they forget that anything generating income or interfering with another's potential income dramatically increases the chance of suit.

The most compelling questions are: (1) Is a proposed use of another's work apt to offend? (2) Are expected benefits worth the bother and possible cost to resolve a dispute?

Why not ask? Only if the owner says "no" does the second question need to be addressed.


More general information:

* Copyright Basics and other helpful bulletins are available at the Copyright Office.
* Copyright in Computer Software;
* Copyright in Visual Arts;
* Publishers' Rights and Wrongs in the Cyberage;
* Copyrights and Beyond in the Digital Age.


Revised July 23, 2006.
Earlier versions of this discussion have been published in Intellectual Property Counselor (BLI, June 2001) and elsewhere.

Franklin Pierce Law Center
Two White Street • Concord, NH 03301 • 603.228.1541
© Franklin Pierce Law Center 2002-06. All rights reserved.



The End of Economic Growth?

The End of Economic Growth?
by Adam Parsons
April, 2007

“Economic growth cuts poverty!” is forever the inveterate, unrelenting dictum of World Bank statisticians. These four simple words, stale and contentious as they are, were in fact the title of a recent Forbes magazine article based on World Bank predictions for eliminating poverty in South East Asia[1]. As reported in the American journal that speaks to the super-rich, if economic growth continues to increase in this region of the world with the largest concentration of poor people, then “poverty can be significantly reduced, if not eliminated, within a generation.”

This prognosis, made by the bank’s Operations Director for South Asia, was shortly followed by their World Development Indicators for 2007[2] and the apparently good news that absolute poverty levels have fallen beneath one billion people. The bank’s Chief Economist, François Bourguignon, was careful to point out that these figures “go beyond growth” to ask how income is distributed and whether health care and education are conjointly improving, but the unspoken assumptions remained clear; globalisation is good, free trade and liberalisation is a prerequisite for ending poverty, and the only answer to human needs is a market-based world economy as defined by the Washington Consensus.

The release of the annual figures, which this year seemed to be almost swept under the carpet by the international media, is still crucially important for two reasons; not only are the World Bank’s statistics the only view we have on whether the incomes of poor people are rising or falling, but the implied success they demonstrate in tackling poverty is used as powerful ammunition by the rich nations who seek to perpetuate and defend the existing economic architecture which is inherently biased in their favour. The basic motivation for the World Bank to continue propagating these figures, according to many interpreters[3], is to vindicate their policies and prove they are working. It is worthwhile, in this context, to repeatedly examine and demystify the basic arguments of the pro-globalisation thinkers and so-called ‘trickle-down theorists’.

How Not to Count the Poor

In 2002, a report titled How not to count the poor was published by two US academics, Sanjay Reddy and Thomas Pogge, who contended that the World Bank figures on how many poor people there are in the world were “misleading and innaccurate”, “neither meaningful nor reliable”, and extrapolated “incorrectly from limited data”[4]. So conclusive and unequivocal was this assessment that the United Nations followed it up with their own damning summary of faulty methodology and “conceptual errors”[5].

When the annual figures on world income were released in the following year, many activists and NGOs naturally didn’t hesitate to question them; the arguments weren’t simply focused on the technical minutiae of ‘conversion factors’ and ‘Purchasing Power Parity’ measurements, however, but on the underlying implications of what such shoddily researched yet supposedly authoritative information really means. As one commentator in the UK wrote[6]: “That the key global economic statistic has for so long been derived by means which are patently useless is a telling indication of how little the men who run the world care about the impact of their policies. If they cannot be bothered even to produce a meaningful measure of global poverty, we have no reason to believe their claim that they wish to address it.”

The latest World Bank figures are more cautiously presented, with a notable emphasis this year on the inclusion of China and India. In the first two World Development Reports in 1990 and 2000/01 these two largest nations on earth were embarrassingly not even mentioned, which was consequently a major argument against the reports lack of veracity, although they are now both referred to as a chief reason for a decrease in world poverty levels – even when you consider developing countries “without these two giants”, we are told, “you still find very high growth rates.”[7]

Putative Successes

The survey of data goes on to quote a number of putative successes; real per capita income growth in Sub-Saharan Africa has been stronger in the period since 2000 “than any time since the 1960s”, it says, alongside higher growth rates in middle income countries, and there is no hesitation in asserting that “one factor behind this performance is strong macroeconomic polices”, in other words, those policies known collectively as economic liberalism. This growth in low-income countries, it goes on to brazenly attest, has “clearly resulted” in lower poverty incidence.

Some of the other improvements need not be questioned in the same way, such as the 34 million children in the developing world who gained the chance to attend primary school, the nearly doubling of external financing for health and education, and the “significant progress” made on Millennium Goal 7 to halve the proportion of people without access to safe drinking water by 2015, but the overall picture that the report portrays needs to be permanently kept in mind. Extreme poverty is “increasingly concentrated in fragile states”, it says, which comprise 35 stricken countries like Gaza, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, the Congo and Sudan, although Sub-Saharan Africa is more stricken in general than any other corner of the earth; the share of the region’s people living in extreme poverty may well have dropped 4.7 percentage points between 1999 and 2004, but it still results in 41 percent of the entire population left struggling to survive on less than one dollar a day, and a world in which an estimated 16,000 children die daily from hunger-related causes. Sub-Saharan Africa now accounts for 30 percent of the world’s extreme poor, says the report, compared with 19 percent in 1990, and “only 11 percent” in 1981, still an almost 300 percent difference in less than three decades.

Does the “rapid global growth” in 2006, in this context, really provide cause for the “optimism about progress in advancing the Millennium Development Goals” as the World Bank continues to submit? Is just under one billion people living in extreme poverty, about a sixth of the human population, with almost half of the remaining developing world living on two dollars a day, really cause for a note of “optimism” at all?

Depressing Contradictions

For a report that seeks to subtly toot its own horn, it is amazing how many depressing contradictions can be found when comparing its findings to concurrent happenings in the world. On the day after the World Bank’s poverty figures were released, Ban Ki-moon, the new Secretary-General of the United Nations, visited East Africa to reflect on the fact that the number of slum-dwellers worldwide is set to reach a new high in 2007. Speaking in Nairobi, a city that boasts the largest slum in Sub-Saharan Africa, the U.N. emphasised that unless more private sector help is provided then the developing country governments alone will be increasingly overwhelmed by the challenge to provide adequate housing for the poorest of the poor.

This year has also seen the release of a number of independent and disquieting studies into poverty and wealth distribution; according to the recent McClatchy Newspapers analysis of 2005 census figures in the US, for example, the number of poor Americans living in deep or severe poverty has reached a 32-year high, growing by 26 percent from 2000 to 2005, what they described as “a distressing sidebar to an unusual economic expansion.”[8] Poverty levels are falling, says the World Bank. Poverty levels, at least on a national basis in the richest countries, are actually increasing like never before, say the independent studies. In the UK, even the latest official figures show that poverty has increased for the first time since Tony Blair came to power in 1997.[9]

Crisis of Inequality

The key issue concerns not just poverty levels and the misleading ‘dollar a day’ measure, but the corresponding crisis of inequality. The World Bank report freely admitted that despite abject poverty being on an apparent decline in global terms, inequality among citizens in the same country is on the rise. In the past decade, it also admits, poverty reduction was not always or everywhere commensurate with income growth. As contemporary studies have shown[10], inequality is in fact harmful to economic growth, and income distribution is not only worsening year-on-year, but it results in the paradox of overall decreasing poverty levels and a simultaneous increase in the number of people living in extreme poverty.

The income gap has so widened, according to a recent analysis of tax data in the US[11], that the top 10 percent of Americans have reached a level of national income share not seen since before the Wall Street Crash of 1929. The top one percent of wage earners, it showed, saw an increase of 14 percent, compared to an overall percentage decrease in earnings for 90 percent of the country. The income gap is growing faster in the US, as other figures reveal[12], than in any other developed nation.

Corporate Greed

The ongoing squabble in Congress concerning CEO pay is a like an allegory to help understand the question of corporate greed; members of a powerful lobby group called the Business Round Table[13] are hotly contending proposed measures to rein in CEO compensation. The members of the Round Table, it turned out[14], received 50 percent more than even the average Chief Executive – about nine million dollars each compared to the average CEO annual salary of six million dollars – and still they bitterly fight to keep their salaries growing.

The US government, meanwhile, continues to argue that its tax policies, benefiting the top one percent of the country more than anyone else, are not adding to the widening income gap but are simply “more progressive”[15]. Higher taxes for the rich, they argue, would cause top earners to work less and take fewer risks, thereby stifling the deity of economic growth and threatening the goose that lays the golden eggs, a claim left unsupported by a shred of economic theory or empirical evidence[16]. It doesn’t require any study or national survey to comprehend the reason why corporations are so keen on maintaining the status quo; in the words of the late British economist Sir Dudley Seers, “Those with high incomes… will inevitably try to find ways of maintaining privilege, resorting… to political violence rather than giving it up[17].”

Growth Isn't Working

The pursuit of economic growth as a sole measure of national success is not, despite the dogmas of the World Bank, a foregone conclusion or an inevitable assumption. The mounting evidence is unassailable; as written in the recent New Economics Foundation report entitled Growth Isn’t Working[18], if one billion dollars in overseas aid truly lifted 434,000 people out of extreme poverty, as claimed by a separate World Bank report[19], and if the developed country governments had kept their 1970 pledge to provide 0.7 percent of national income in aid, then the world would be an altogether different place. Rather than setting the Millennium Development Goals and merely aiming to halve poverty below the one-dollar-a-day line by 2015, world leaders could instead have been celebrating its complete eradication. We would now be six years into a programme to eradicate two-dollar-a-day poverty.

The reality, of course, is far from a fairy tale ending; the shortfall of aid from the 1970 target is over $150 billion, and even in the past two years, despite G8 promises made in 2005 to increase aid by 50 billion dollars before the end of the decade, overall aid levels have continued to fall[20]. Global priorities, despite the World Bank’s disingenuous “optimism” and rhetoric, are clearly more aligned with hegemony and primacy than a sincere pledge to eradicate poverty. Patronage-aid, as concluded by the NEF report[21], mainly serves as a power tool for developed country governments and international institutions like the World Bank and IMF, thereby entrenching further “the inequitable structures of the global economic system which underlies the more fundamental problem.”

Hackneyed Metaphors

The ‘trickle-down theorists’, in no short number, argue with the same few hackneyed metaphors to illustrate their obsession with economic growth, like the rising tide that lifts all boats, or that, rather than share the cake more evenly, it is better to bake an even larger one. It is almost universally accepted amongst economists and governments that if more national and global income is created through economic growth, then a trickle-down effect will follow, thereby enabling the poorest members of society to increase their proportion of total income. As the rich man eats more cake, you might say, the poor man scrambles for a few more crumbs. What this complacent premise fails to account for is the billions of people earning less than two dollars a day who are fortunate to own a corrugated shelter, let alone a ‘cake’ or a ‘boat’ to rise in. Poverty eradication is a nice enough idea, the lesson seems to be, so long as it remains consistent with the assumption of the rich getting richer.

To plead for a redistribution of wealth, even for a one percent redistribution of the incomes of the richest 20 percent to the poorest 20 percent, is tantamount to asking for a magic wand so long as the existing macroeconomic polices drive international politics. A belief in the panacea of economic growth could be called the noumena of today’s world leaders, as without it the ideological premise of the Washington Consensus and it’s ‘ten prescriptions’ would crumble before our eyes; liberalisation and privatisation only make sense if market forces are continually unleashed in the blind pursuit of infinite expansion. Another rudimentary metaphor to add to the trickle-down theorists limited repertoire, in this sense, might be the description of a cancerous tumour.

To borrow a quote from a key U.N. paper on the ignominies of poverty reduction[22]; “There are times when the enunciation of the most elementary common sense,” said the late Keynesian economist J.K. Galbraith, “has an aspect of eccentricity, irrationality, even mild insanity.” One might hope that the Neoliberalists disavowal of those who dare to question the profit motive will one day be viewed in a similar vein to the arrest of Galileo when he affirmed that the sun doesn’t orbit the earth. The only certainty is that a paradigm shift in thinking is required if our obsession with outmoded orthodox economics is ever to be overcome, if our “failure to make what is important measurable rather than making what is measurable important”[23] is ever to be understood, and if the truly panacean solution of the principle of sharing is ever to govern economic affairs. The only question then remaining is how far we continue on a path towards disaster before the wake up call is heard.


Adam W. Parsons is the editor of Share The World’s Resources (, an NGO campaigning for global economic and social justice. Adam can be reached editor at

[1] Chisaki Watanabe. 2007. “World Bank: Economic Growth Cuts Poverty.” (Forbes Magazine) 4 April.
[2] World Bank, 2007. “World Development Indicators.” Washington D.C. (The World Bank) 13 April.

[3] For example: Chakravarthi Raghavan. 2002. “World Bank poverty data, methodology faulted”. Third World Network.

[4] Sanjay G. Reddy & Thomas W. Pogge, 2005. “How Not to Count the Poor” (Colombia University) Version 6.2.3. 29 October.

[5] Chakravarthi Raghavan. 2002. Ibid.

[6] George Monbiot, 2003. “Poor, but pedicured: It appears that those at the bottom are getting richer - but sadly the maths just doesn't add up.” (The Guardian) 6 May.

[7] World Bank, 2007. “World Development Indicators.” Washington D.C. (The World Bank) 13 April.

[8] Tony Pugh, 2007. “U.S Economy Leaving Record Numbers in Severe Poverty.” (McClatchy Newspapers) 22 February.

[9] Mike Brewer, Alissa Goodman, Alastair Muriel & Luke Sibieta, 2007. “Poverty and inequality in the UK: 2007.” (The Institute for Fiscal Studies: IFS Briefing Note No. 73). 27 March.

[10] For example: Jan Vandemoortele, 2002. “Are we really reducing global poverty?” (United Nations Development Programme: Bureau for Development Policy) New York, July 2002.

[11] Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez. “Income Inequality in the United States: 1913-1998,” (Quarterly Journal of Economics). February 2003. Data updated in March 2007. The updated data series is available at

[12] Figures reported in Paul Buchheit, 2007. “The Income Gap: Profits Up 93%, CEO Pay Up 571% -- Worker Salaries Stagnant.” ( 28 February.

[13] Sarah Anderson, Sam Pizzigati, Chuck Collins, John Cavanagh and Charlie Cray. 2007. “Selfish Interest: How Much Business Roundtable CEOs Stand to Lose from Real Reform of Runaway Executive Pay.” (Institute for Policy Studies). 10 April.

[14] Chris Frates, 2007. “Highest-Paid CEOs Fight Compensation Reform.” (The Politico). 11 April.

[15] Paul Buchheit, 2007. ( Ibid.

[16] Robert H. Frank, 2007. “In the Real World of Work and Wages, Trickle-Down Theories Don't Hold Up.” (The New York Times). 12 April.

[17] Seers, Dudley. 1969. The Meaning of Development. International Development Review 11(4).

[18] David Woodward and Andrew Simms, 2006. “Growth isn't working: the unbalanced distribution of costs and benefits from economic growth.” (New Economics Foundation). 23 January.

[19] Goldin, I. et al (2002) “The role and effectiveness of development assistance: lessons from World Bank experience” (World Bank: Washington DC) 18 March.

[20] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2007. “Development aid from OECD countries fell 5.1% in 2006.” (OECD). 3 April.

[21] David Woodward and Andrew Simms, 2006. Ibid.

[22] Jan Vandemoortele, 2002. Ibid.

[23] David Woodward and Andrew Simms, 2006. Ibid. See 'Conclusion'.

Copyright Share The World's Resources ( 2007



Malipenga withdraws case against The Post

Malipenga withdraws case against The Post
By Noel Sichalwe
Friday April 27, 2007 [04:00]

LUSAKA lawyer Robson Malipenga has withdrawn a defamation case against the Post newspaper. Malipenga who is aspiring for the Law Association of Zambia chairmanship has since filed a notice to discontinue the matter. Malipenga sued The Post for damages following a story about a Patrick Ngulube, who sued him for allegedly swindling him out of K166 million.

Ngulube had in December 2005 sued Malipenga for allegedly swindling him out of K100 million. According to the statement of claim that was filed before Lusaka High Court judge Timothy Kabalata, Ngulube stated he sued Malipenga in relation to the house he wanted to purchase.

He contended that in April 2004, he responded to an advert for sale of a house and was later introduced to Malipenga who was representing the vendor. He stated that Malipenga proposed that he represent both him and his client in order to speed up the transaction.

Judge Kabalata awarded Ngulube K166 million in damages and 20 per cent interest. “By admission, I enter judgment as follows, for the plaintiff the sum of K166 million with interest at short term deposit. Damages will be assessed by the deputy registrar and cost to the plaintiff,” judge Kabalata stated.

However, after the publication of the story, Malipenga through his lawyers Paul Bandala Banda & Company sued The Post claiming damages for defamation. He stated that The Post published information about him in relation to his profession that he swindled his client out of K100 million. He claimed to have been seriously injured in his character, conduct and reputation.

In defence Post lawyer Chola Kafwabulula from MNB Legal Practitioners denied the defamatory allegations arguing that the comment was on a matter of public interest. Malipenga has meanwhile confirmed his instructions to withdraw the matter in a letter to his lawyer Paul Bandala Banda & Company. “We refer to the above and the discussion. We confirm our instructions that this matter be discontinued,” he stated.

Malipenga had sued The Post over the story that was published on December 3, 2005 under the headline, ‘Retiree sues Lusaka lawyer over money.” Malipenga is contesting the position of LAZ chairman along with Fraser Chishimba and Elijah Banda. The vice-chairmanship is contested by Mwila Chitabo and Stephen Lungu.

Labels: ,


Zambia Sugar, Zesco in talks over Nakambala expansion

Zambia Sugar, Zesco in talks over Nakambala expansion
By Joan Chirwa and Florence Bupe
Tuesday April 24, 2007 [09:41]

ZAMBIA Sugar Plc has engaged into discussions with ZESCO Limited over the use of water in Kafue River for its Nakambala expansion project. But an energy expert has called for the re-evaluation of the reported impact that increased water abstraction for irrigation purposes from the Kafue River will have on power generation.

In an interview in Mazabuka, Zambia Sugar corporate affairs manager Lovemore Sievu has disclosed that his company would continue discussing with ZESCO Limited, considering that the interests of the two companies were neither divergent nor conflicting.
ZESCO Limited managing director Rhodnie Sisala last month wrote a letter to the board secretary of the Water Development Board copied to the Permanent Secretary at the Ministry of Energy and Water Development.

Sisala raised his concerns over the Zambia Sugar expansion project, indicating that the K840 billion scheme risked jeopardizing the operation of the Kafue Gorge power station including plans to develop the Kafue Gorge Lower and the Itezhi-tezhi power stations.

But Sievu told The Business Post that Zambia Sugar had received approval by the Water Board for water rights in the Kafue River. “The Water Board approved our application for water rights in the Kafue River,” Sievu said. “Zambia Sugar Plc recognizes the strategic importance of ZESCO Limited to the country. And to that effect, Zambia Sugar is dialoguing with ZESCO Limited to see how we can co-operate and work well in the future.”

Sievu said Zambia Sugar, during the time of expansion, would increase its own generation of power. “The increase in power generation by Zambia Sugar will enable ZESCO Limited to meet electricity demand for other people. Zambia Sugar is a large consumer of electricity in the Southern Province and when it starts generating most of the power on its own, more people will have access to electricity,” Sievu said.

“We are actually complementing what ZESCO limited is doing in terms of electricity generation on one hand while relying on them on the other hand. We will continue to discuss with ZESCO limited as we are both interested in having electricity supplied to all the consumers in the country.”

Sisala, in his letter, expressed fears of adverse effects on ZESCO’s current and future operations if the proposed expansion in water abstraction by Zambia Sugar was allowed. The government recently granted Zambia Sugar permission for its expansion project after extensive deliberations with the Water Development Board and ZESCO Limited.

Sisala further indicated that a large-scale increase in the extraction of water from the Kafue River would have an adverse effect on ZESCO and other users of electricity due to a drastic reduction in the volumes of water.

The Zambia Sugar expansion project will involve upgrading of the existing factory, construction of roads and canals as well as the planting of sugar cane on over 10,000 hectare of additional land. This is projected to increase the company’s annual production from the current 246,000 metric tonnes to 440,000 metric tones by 2010, making it the second largest producer of Sugar after Sudan.

Meanwhile, energy expert Charles Haanyika has called for the re-evaluation of the reported impact that increased water abstraction for irrigation purposes from the Kafue River will have on power generation.

Reacting to the decision by the Water Development Board to grant additional water rights to Zambia Sugar Plc for purposes of irrigation to facilitate the company’s expansion programme, Haanyika said increased abstraction of water from the Kafue River, which is Zambia’s main source of power, might impact negatively on power generation capacity.

Haanyika noted that the project had raised a lot of controversy that needed serious and urgent attention, as all stakeholders would be affected. “This project is a very complex issue, and the decision by the water board to ignore ZESCO’s concerns may have serious repercussions even on Zambia Sugar itself because they also need energy,” Haanyika said. “The fact that they (Zambia Sugar) are expanding their cultivation hecterage and production means need will arise for more power. Therefore, there is need for all the parties involved to carry out a detailed evaluation of the situation and reach a compromise that will not disadvantage any stakeholder.”

Haanyika said the Water Development Board should have taken into account the concerns raised by the ZESCO Limited and come up with ways of balancing their decision. “ZESCO’s concerns are justified because the country’s demand for power is ever increasing, but the volumes of water are not. We need as a country to be very careful with the use of this finite commodity, especially in light of the looming power shortage in the region,” he said.

Haanyika also explained that increased abstraction of water from the Kafue River could lead to higher soil erosion, and this could ultimately have adverse effects on agricultural activities in the surrounding areas.

However, Haanyika pointed out that Zambia Sugar Plc’s expansion programme would be beneficial to Zambia’s economic growth if required measures were well handled. “It is obvious that once Zambia Sugar expands its production capacity, the country will be bale to export more and this will greatly benefit the country in terms of revenue,” Haanyika said. “However, relevant authorities and stakeholders need to ensure that concerns are carefully studied and measures put in place to avoid well- intended projects from working against certain players, and the nation as a whole.”

Labels: ,


Thursday, April 26, 2007

Populist ministers warned

Populist ministers warned

PRESIDENT Mwanawasa has cautioned ministers against engaging in illegal activities and making populists decisions that were against national interest. Mr Mwanawasa said there was a tendency by some ministers to only act on decisions that they thought made them popular to the public. “I want to caution you that when you are appointed minister, there is a tendency by certain people to always try to do things which will not make them unpopular to the people. Now, your function is to make decisions which are pleasing to the people of Zambia but only if it is necessary," Mr Mwanawasa said.

The President said this at State House yesterday during a swearing-in ceremony. Those swore in were Minister of Information and Broadcasting Services, Mike Mulongoti and his Gender counterpart, Patricia Mulasikwanda. Mr Mwanawasa also swore in Deputy Minister of Lands, Nassim Hamir and Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet in charge of finance and economic development, Likolo Ndalamei.

The President said ministers should not hesitate to act on decisions that looked unpopular when in the long run they would be remembered as having been good leaders. "There should not be a situation where your children will come and condemn you for causing perpetual difficulties. If it means cleaning the City of Lusaka where there are illegally built buildings, ministers should go ahead with such a decision because this might seem unpopular today but will be a blessing in future,” Mr Mwanawasa said.

He said it was important that the people in decision-making positions took note that the City of Lusaka was ugly. Mr Mwanawasa urged ministers to acquaint themselves with the constitutional provisions and avoid illegal acts. On Mr Ndalamei, the President hailed him for his hard work when he was managing director of the Zambia National Commercial Bank and for the role he played in the process of selling 49 percent shares to Rabo Bank of Netherlands.

He asked Mr Ndalamei to help provide answers to the many economic challenges in the country because Zambians were in a hurry to see development. On Mr Hamir, Mr Mwanawasa said there were many scams at the Ministry of Lands and advised him against getting involved in vices.

Labels: ,


Levy's demagoguery

Levy's demagoguery
By Editor
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:00]

It seems that politicians are so accustomed to giving illogical or bad-faith arguments as long as they are intended for their own political gain. And Levy Mwanawasa appears to be among those politicians who think that political demagoguery should be a norm rather than the exception in the practice of politics. On the balance of the facts before us, we think that Levy's demagoguery on the constitution-making process is getting out of hand and the earlier it is clipped the better.

Yes, it is not in dispute that Levy is currently enjoying the privilege of leading our nation. He is the elected leader of Zambia and it is time-wasting for him to keep drumming that unambiguous fact into our heads. But he should not mislead himself into believing that even when he is the leader of this country he cannot be led by the people's wishes.

Levy may be the President of Zambia, but that does not mean that he should act according to his own wishes or aspirations. In case he is mistaken, we are not here as Zambians to sing for him and shout "follow the leader" in whatever he feels and thinks he wants to do for the nation. Instead, Levy has to learn to follow what the majority of the people want to be done in the interest of the nation and not for an individual's personal agenda.

From Levy's tone, we get the impression that he is telling the entire nation that it is only he, together with his colleagues in government, who is capable enough of deciding what is good for us as a nation and that he will give that which he feels we need at a time when he thinks it is right to do so. Are we an impotent or weak citizenry for Levy to just order us anyhow and tell us whatever he feels should come out of his mouth?

Levy has a mandate to lead us, but that does not in any way suggest that he cannot follow the people's popular will on national affairs. And when we talk about the constitution-making process, the people's will has on a number of occasions been made very plain to Levy. The people have told Levy that a new constitution is one of their main priorities and that it should be adopted through an acceptable mode such as a constituent assembly. When Levy is reminded by genuine organisations such as the Oasis Forum of the need to be serious with the constitution-making process and to look at their alternative roadmap, the best he thinks he can do is mock them and refer to some out-of-tune metaphors.

When we talk about the need for a new constitution and giving some seriousness to this process, we are not asking for kindness or benevolence from Levy. We are simply saying that this is what the people want and it is therefore what a sensible government ought to follow. We expect that those in government, especially Levy, should have a good sense of judgement and see where the people's wishes lie on the constitution-making process.

What is even more painful is that we should be discussing these issues today when in fact Levy is on record having told the nation in 2003 that he wanted a new constitution to be in place as soon as was possible. How strange it is that he should now find it convenient to seek all sorts of excuses, including floods, to frustrate a process he initially said he wished to be completed in good time. In case Levy has forgotten, this is what he said on April 17, 2003 when he announced a 41-member Constitution Review Commission:

"I repeat what I have said so many times before that we aim to come up with a constitution which is people driven. Predetermining the mode of adopting the constitution either by me as President or by Cabinet is not only undemocratic but contradicts our aim that the constitution must be people-driven. We cannot delay this process any longer as it is of utmost importance that we should have a new constitution as soon as possible...The difficulty which I apprehend is that our current Constitution appears to me to allow no other method of altering the Constitution but through the national assembly and the process of changing this method seems somewhat impossible. We could all benefit by the wise counsel of those who consider that notwithstanding the voter apathy in the country it is still possible to amend the current constitution and provide for adoption of the new Constitution by constituent assembly."

There you are, Levy! Those are your own words, we have not manufactured any of them.

When Levy talks about the need for a people-driven constitution, this is what the Oasis Forum is saying and asking him to do. By making their own recommendations to Levy, the Oasis Forum were just responding to his emphasis on the need for the process to be driven by the people and not by self-serving politicians like himself. It is now very clear that Levy is contradicting himself when it comes to the issue of participation of the people in the constitution-making process.

On April 17, 2003, Levy told the nation: "We cannot delay this process any longer as it is of utmost importance and we should have a new constitution as soon as possible." So where is Levy's consistency? Can we surely say that Levy has been consistent on this matter? When we compare his statement of April 17, 2003 and his recent pronouncements on the constitution-making process, it is clear that Levy has changed his colours; he is now like a chameleon which changes its appearance to suit a particular environment. Levy has changed his language perhaps to suit his present mood.

We should not be blamed to conclude that Levy started the constitution making process for the sole purpose of gaining political mileage, since he was aware that it was one of the contentious electoral subjects prior to his election in 2001. It is now clear that this process was not started with a sincere motivation to fulfil the people's wishes. At least that is what Levy's actions suggest to us. We are saying this because we are failing to understand Levy's apprehension and apparent resistance to calls for an expedited constitution making process. Besides, most of the work has been done by the CRC.

Levy is the one who was asking for wise counsel on the way forward in terms of overcoming some of the obstacles ahead of the constitution-making process. Yet it is the same Levy who is now rejecting the kind of counsel that he needs if we are to make progress in this process. Instead, Levy has become the obstacle to the constitution-making process and perhaps we need the collective counsel of Zambians to find ways of overcoming him on this matter. We need to stop Levy's demagoguery.

Labels: , , ,


I won't go to court over constitution, says Levy

I won't go to court over constitution, says Levy
By George Chellah
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:00]

PRESIDENT Mwanawasa yesterday said he would not go to court over the constitution-making process but his critics should go there and get judicial interpretation. And President Mwanawasa challenged the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to prove their capability if they wanted him to be sympathetic with their call for financial assistance because he was not prepared to throw good money after the bad.

During the swearing-in ceremony at State House of the newly appointed information minister Mike Mlongoti, gender in development minister Patricia Mulasikwanda and lands deputy minister Nassim Hamir not to take oaths as a formality, President Mwanawasa said his letter to the Non-governmental Organisation Coordinating Council (NGOCC) on the constitution-making process contained hard facts of law.

"A few days ago I issued a letter, which I have written to the NGOCC which was misrepresented as amounting to me calling them stubborn. That letter discussed the law, discussed the constitution, discussed how the constitution should be amended. Those were hard facts of law," President Mwanawasa said.

“Up to now, I do not think that I misdirected myself. We had a statement immediately thereafter from Oasis, that ‘we will soon answer what the President has said. The answer was not given. What we heard afterwards, four days after was that, ‘no, we are having a funeral we are in bereavement so we can’t talk.We have got all the answers, we have all the answers to President Mwanawasa we will answer him.’ I don’t know how long it took them to mourn. I am a lawyer myself so if a lawyer dies, I am also in bereavement as a lawyer. I am able to make various statements, why can’t they answer?”

President Mwanawasa further complained of people calling him names over the constitution-making process.

“Instead we are having people crying out, calling me names saying ‘the constitution must be amended before 2008. I want to be on the side of those who are right. I will not be on the side of the government because the government is wrong,” he said. “Please I have thrown a challenge, that challenge is simple, it does not lie in you throwing blows at me or calling me names. Show that I am wrong and the public will hear you.

“I have said if we cannot convince each other, if you feel that we cannot convince each other go to court. I am not going to court, they say uupamfiwe ee ulwa necibi it’s them who are suffering from diarrhoea so they have to go to court and get judicial interpretation. But otherwise let them not confuse the people.”

And President Mwanawasa urged Mlongoti, Mulasikwanda and Hamir not to take oaths as a formality.

“The intention of these oaths is for you to publicly commit yourself to be faithful, to be sincere to the people of Zambia. You are swearing before me. I represent the people of Zambia. Therefore these oaths are not oaths just to me personally but to the entire Zambia,” he said.

He advised the three ministers not to hesitate to pass right decisions that might look unpopular.

“The three ministers I want to caution you, when you are appointed minister, there is a tendency by certain people to always try to do things which will make them not unpopular, to be pleasing to the general public,” President Mwanawasa said. “Now your function is to take decisions, which are pleasing to the people of Zambia. But if it is necessary, do not be hesitant to pass decisions, which today might look unpopular because at the end of the day you want people to come and support and praise you that you are the leader.

Not a situation where people, your children, your children’s children....posterity will condemn you as having caused the perpetual difficulty. So if it means cleaning the city of Lusaka because there are structures which have been built not according to the law... because instead of people respecting the streets as places where people and vehicles will move, they turn it into a market place. If it means you removing them making the city clean, you do it. That action may today look unpopular but later when the street is looking clean they will praise you.”

President Mwanawasa said the city of Lusaka was currently looking very ugly.
“And for those who are insincere, they blame the leaders of this country for the state of affairs. So it is important that those decisions must be taken. It could be constitutional review, you have taken the oath just like I took the oath to protect the constitution and the laws of Zambia,” President Mwanawasa said. He urged the new ministers to acquaint themselves with the provisions of the constitution in to avoid making illegal decisions.

President Mwanawasa advised Hamir not to join the scam at the Ministry of Lands.
“There is a lot of scam, don’t join. You should be a solution,” he said.

And President Mwanawasa advised the new ACC chairperson justice Valentine Chileshe to remove the stigma associated with the fight against corruption.

“My Lord, Mr Justice Chileshe and you my friend Mbikusita-Lewanika, I want you to appreciate the fact that the position to which you have ascended is very important to our national development. We have received massive donor confidence because of our fight against corruption. This is a very important programme. You must remove the stigma, which unfortunately has come to exist that certain suspected criminals, plunderers are being targeted; they are not guilty...that we find it for political expedience to prosecute them,” President Mwanawasa.

“You will find Honourable Chileshe that my government does not believe in vengeance. My government is governed by the rule of law. Government shall be of laws rather than of men. So I will need you as a first step, you and your fellow commissioners to discuss and find ways by which the ACC can be improved.”

He said he was not at all satisfied with the performance of the ACC.
“Now we, the government set up the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) and the money laundering unit. You will need to find out as to why we have more confidence in DEC than the ACC? It means that there is something wrong in ACC, so you sit down and find out which is the way forward,” President Mwanawasa said.

“Then after that I will like you all the commissioners to sit down with senior officers at the ACC to discuss their performance in the partnership of Zambia. It is not good at all.”

President Mwanawasa complained that cases were taking so long to prosecute.
“When I was a lawyer, when I was appearing before you my Lord, both when you were a magistrate and judge you recall that there was never a case which took five years for an accused to be put on his defence. But it’s happening now. It means that because the case has been the time you take a case to court or by the time you lead evidence either the crucial witnesses will have died or their memories will have been damned,” President Mwanawasa said.

“And all it requires to get an acquittal is a clever lawyer and he will ask very nasty questions and then witness will just be scratching his head. And sometimes you say it’s a slip of the tongue, the tongue is safely anchored there in the mouth. But because you have kept too long...and then the other development is that because of the time it takes to prosecute these cases, the witnesses find that it’s unfashionable to give evidence against the suspects because the suspects are heroes.

“So they don’t want to be blamed. So the evidence, which they will give in court, will be different from the statement which they gave at the police station. Now that is the delay caused by your commission or the law enforcement agencies. But there are cases and there are many where adjournments are caused by the courts. They will allow adjournments on flimsy of excuses, sometimes it’s they themselves. The Honourable Chief Justice is not here but I am sure he will get this message. I want him to sit down with some senior judges and find out how they are going to deal with these cases.”

President Mwanawasa also said the prisons were very full of people waiting for trial on murder and other cases for which bail was not available.

“Now because of that, justice is not being administered. Very soon I shall be signing a statutory instrument in which I have to commute the death penalty to life or terms of imprisonment and some will be given terms of imprisonment, they will be leaving the prison,” President Mwanawasa said.

“That is because a situation has arisen in the prison, it’s so crowded... it’s so inhumane. So we want the judiciary to play their tango, law enforcement agencies will play their tango, the central government will play its tango and so we expect the judiciary to play its tango. They shouldn’t regard themselves as enemies of the executive because we are in the same boat to deliver development.”

President Mwanawasa said judicial development was national development. “I know that finances have been insufficient to address the many challenges, which the ACC faces. But you will find that those challenges go beyond lack of funds. What I was telling the Minister of Finance the other day is that, ‘if the ACC want me to be sympathetic for their calls of financial assistance then they will have to prove that they are capable. I am not prepared to throw good money after bad’,” he said.

President Mwanawasa praised new deputy Secretary to the Cabinet Likolo Ndalamei for bringing sanity to the Zambia National Commercial Bank where he was managing director.

“At a very difficulty time, you were able to bring sanity to that bank to an extent where a good section of our community felt that it was wrong to sell so many shares to a foreign investor. I am glad that you have accepted my invitation to serve government in the position of deputy secretary to Cabinet in economic and development affairs,” President Mwanawasa said.

“We have so many challenges, we expect that you will assist government in finding answers to the various economic challenges, development challenges because the people of Zambia are in a hurry to develop. When you hear them shout abuse at you don’t think that they hate you, no they don’t hate you. On the contrary they will like to see development. I would like to say with pride that we have significant achievements over the past five and half years.

“Those achievements have been made through hard work through sacrifice, but when we took over, things were so bad but you don’t expect them to improve overnight. There are a lot people who haven’t benefited yet from what we are doing. So our effort at the moment is to ensure that all benefit, is to ensure that we remove poverty because poverty is a hindrance to development.”

Labels: , , ,


Health ministry ready for K24bn expired drugs queries - Chituwo

Health ministry ready for K24bn expired drugs queries - Chituwo
By Noel Sichalwe
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:01]

HEALTH minister Dr Brian Chituwo yesterday said his ministry is ready to clarify queries by Auditor General Anna Chifungula on the K24 billion worth of expired drugs. During a tour of Medical Stores Limited (MSL) in Lusaka, Dr Chituwo said the figure of K24 billion was presumably taken from the Ministry of Finance report of the board of survey on the inspection, verification and disposal of expired stock of drug and medical supplies for a period of October to November 2005.

Dr Chituwo said given the problem of accumulated expired and damaged drugs, his permanent secretary Dr Simon Miti requested the permanent secretary at Ministry of Finance to constitute a board of survey to inspect, determine value of expired drugs and recommend the best means of disposing of the expired stock at MSL.

He said the Ministry of Finance, as a government institution responsible for public assets and executing public and finance Act, constituted a board of survey comprising of competent people in November 2005 to quantify the expired drugs before the Auditor General made inquiries.

Dr Chituwo said the need to verify the cost of expired drugs and to come up with disposal options arose in 2004 when the government engaged a new management contractor at MSL who needed space for its logistical operations.

He said the board of survey was also aware that Central Board of Health was in the process of being dissolved and in accordance with the public and finance Act, the assets and liabilities to be passed on to government had to be determined.

“The drugs that largely contributed to the K24 billion expired drugs are those that expired between 1997 and 2004 and were supplied between 1994 and 2000 at an estimated cost of K17 billion and constituted unplanned donations from donors which had short shelf life and those that failed quality control tests for various reasons such as damages and breakages,” Dr Chituwo said. “The balance of approximately K7 billion from the K24 billion is due to drugs that were donated directly to various hospitals and health centres by service clubs, churches and NGOs. These drugs were mopped upon expiry and stored at Medical Stores Limited for safety pending disposal and destruction.”

Dr Chituwo said his ministry had in the past four years developed a guideline on donation of drugs, as donations were major contributors to the K24 billion expired drugs.
He said the emphasis in the guideline was on donated drugs having a longer shelf life upon receipt at MSL and to be donated in consultation with Ministry of Health.

Dr Chituwo said to minimize wastage of drugs, his ministry has also embarked on the improvement of drug procurement and management systems and capacity building of health staff.

“It is unfortunate that an impression has been created that these drugs have not been accounted for and were allowed to expire,” Dr Chituwo said. “On the contrary and as already alluded to, the board of survey that was constituted by Ministry of Finance did in fact verify and qualified the stock of expired drugs in 2005 as a proactive action by government.”

Dr. Chituwo said in order to safeguard public health, disposal of expired drugs followed the procedure of the board of survey, notification of intended disposal with Pharmaceutical Regulatory Authority and that the Environmental Council of Zambia also has to witness the disposal.

He said the issue of the expired drugs would be presented to the Parliamentary Accounts Committee (PAC) where the Auditor General would verify some information that his ministry has prepared in response to the audit queries.

Dr Chituwo brushed aside comments by Auditor General Chifungula that she would stop auditing MoH transactions if the officials made it difficult for her office to conduct audits.

He was also happy with the operations of Crown Agents Services which is managing MSL. He said the ARV programme was focused with the stock of about US $60 million.

He wondered how his officials in the distribution process were causing artificial shortages of ARVs in areas like Western Province when they had enough stock.

“What people want to see is service delivery,” he said.
Crown Agents Services country director Misheck Kaoma said they had signed a contract with the government worth US $4.5 million for the provision of medical drugs and equipment for Eastern Western and North Western provinces. He said they were currently renovating the building.

Labels: , , ,


Levy offers Cifire position of deputy sports minister

Levy offers Cifire position of deputy sports minister
By Inonge Noyoo
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:01]

President Levy Mwanawasa is likely to appoint former health minister Angela Cifire as deputy sport, youth and child development minister. According to sources close to Cifire, President Mwanawasa has written to her stating that if she would be available and ready to accept the offer, he was ready to appoint her as deputy minister in the Ministry of Sport, Youth and Child Development.

"I think the President is trying to find out if Angela would be willing to take up this appointment. As you know, it is a demotion because Angela was a full Cabinet minister," the source said.

"From what we hear, it's like the President does not want to announce and then Angela refuses to take up the position because it is a demotion. But in my view, there is no harm in Angela accepting this appointment because we have seen people who have been demoted and later promoted. The former vice-president Mr Lupando Mwape was demoted and later promoted by the same President Mwanawasa.

General Miyanda was also dropped as Republican vice-president by Chiluba and was appointed as education minister; he didn't refuse to accept that lower appointment."

The source said there were rumours that some people from Eastern Province had expressed displeasure at Cifire's dropping.
"I can only urge our people from the east not to be emotional because obviously the President has a good reason for his actions," the source said.

But when reached for comment, Cifire said she had not been communicated to about her being dropped as Cabinet minister or re-appointment to another ministry in a lower capacity.

Cifire, who was in a jovial mood, said she was only aware that she had been dropped and did not know anything about her filing up the now vacant position of deputy minister at the Ministry of Sport, Youth and Child Development.

Labels: , ,


Sundaram calls for public investment

Sundaram calls for public investment
By Chibaula Silwamba
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:01]

Visiting UN assistant secretary general Jomo Kwame Sundaram has observed that the World Bank-championed privatization has failed and suggested the encouragement of public investment. In an interview in Lusaka on Monday, Sundaram - who is UN assistant secretary general for economic development - said privatisation had led to low investment and economic growth.

He said international institutions that promoted privatisation, such as the World Bank, had now realised that the private sector was not investing after they bought off companies that were previously in public hands.

"We have realised that the private sector has not delivered. Even the World Bank, which has in the past decades encouraged privatisation, has realised that the private sector doesn't invest," Sundaram said. "There has been low growth in the past decade because of privatization."

He said the private sector was only interested in making profits instead of delivering the services to the people. "The private sector has not invested and they only invest when they are given incentives. There is a big drop in investment due to the private sector," he said. "Now, public investment should be encouraged."

However, Sundaram said there was need to put in place strict regulations to ensure that once the public sector invested, civil servants did not mismanage the companies.
Sundaram said it would be easy for the public sector to provide services such as electricity and water to all people regardless of where they live.

Sundaram also observed that it was unfortunate that most of the aid to developing countries did not reach the poor.

Labels: , ,


Levy is like a commander without troops - Nawakwi

Levy is like a commander without troops - Nawakwi
By Brighton Phiri
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:00]

PRESIDENT Mwanawasa is like a commander without troops in his fight against corruption, opposition Forum for Democracy and Development (FDD) president Edith Nawakwi has said. Commenting on reports of the missing public funds and Permanent Secretaries’ (PSs) failure to account for the missing funds, Nawakwi said President Mwanawasa’s failure to dismiss the affected PSs confirmed that corruption had become endemic beyond his capacity.

“It is clear that Mr. Mwanawasa has no soldiers to help him fight this corruption. He must now look back and see who is with him in the fight,” Nawakwi said. “Some of us have watched the development with a heavy heart especially on the theft of public funds, which has reached alarming levels in the history of the public service. Indeed, Mr Mwanawasa is like a commander without troops in the fight against corruption. Without soldiers, Mr. Mwanawasa is bound to fail.”

She said it was a pity that President Mwanawasa’s administration, which claimed to be “a government of laws and not men”, had continued to record increased corrupt cases and theft of public resources.

Nawakwi said increased cases of theft of public funds was due to nepotism that came along with President Mwanawasa’s new deal administration.

“Employment in the public service since 2001 has been on the basis of family connection and links. Due to nepotism, the people in the public service have no respect for public assets...after all, my uncle is the President, minister, PS or District Commissioner...with this attitude, theft of public funds is taking place with impunity,” Nawakwi said.

“All this is happening when we have opposition members of parliament who are singing praise and claiming all is well in the country and that we do not need to change government. It is shameful for our opposition members of parliament to praise a government, which has failed to address the problems faced by many people.”

Nawakwi expressed her disappointment with the National Assembly’s attempt to impose secrecy around Public Accounts Committee (PAC) sittings. She said there was no justification for the PAC to sit in camera over issues that related to theft of public funds. Nawakwi called for an independent Auditor General’s Office with constitutional emoluments. “We need an Auditor General’s Office with powers to prosecute,” she said.

She said lack of sanctions against thieving civil servants had contributed towards rampant theft of public funds. Nawakwi wondered why only junior civil servants were arrested and dismissed for stealing public funds. “Why is it that the big fish are not being arrested?” she asked.

On demolition of illegal structures across the country, Nawakwi asked government to come up with a programme that would give direction in addressing the problem of squatter settlement. “As FDD, what we could do is to get to Kalikiliki compound, where government took bulldozers, build 200 housing units and ask those in squatter settlement to move into them,” she said. “This government, which is in good books with the Chinese government, should ask their counterparts on how they handle squatter settlement.”

She asked government to assist the local councils to develop the open spaces instead of engaging in a confrontational campaign against squatter settlement.

Labels: , , ,


Police, council demolish stands in Kamwala

Police, council demolish stands in Kamwala
By Doreen Kambangaji
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:00]

Business at Lusaka’s Kamwala trading area yesterday came to a halt after state and council police moved in to demolish containers and makeshift stands in the area. The police, who moved in the area in the early hours of yesterday, demolished the containers and makeshift stands after several warnings from the government and Lusaka City Council (LCC) for vendors to vacate the streets.

A check at Kamwala trading area revealed that all the shops had been closed and there was heavy police presence in area. Some shop workers, who sought anonymity, said they had closed their shops fearing that their shops would be looted.

“As you can see there is a lot of tension and the owners of the shops don’t want to risk their goods. These people whose makeshift stalls have been demolished threatened to beat anyone who would open their shop,” said one of the workers.

And some marketeers talked to said they were operating in illegal places because they had nowhere to go.

“The government says they have allocated us legal places but these markets are not enough and some of the markets are not easily accessible by customers,” said a marketeer who preferred to remain anonymous.

A heavy presence of police in riot gear was also spotted in all the streets of town and street vendors who usually operate from the streets were not there.

However, vendors operating in makeshift stands around the town centre were doing business as usual.

The vendors talked to said they would not move because they had been operating from the area for so many years and had been left out after the shops were completed.

“Those shops are too expensive for us. We feel left out because that is our place that they have built those shops on and allocated to people who were not even operating from here. They should have built smaller shops that would have been affordable,” said one of the vendors from town centre.

Local government and housing minister Sylvia Masebo said she was happy that at last sanity was returning to the city. She said she had gone to Kamwala shopping area and also the town centre to see for herself the situation on the ground.Masebo said she was happy to see that the streets were finally opened up and people were going about doing their business without hindrance.

“Our challenge now is to sustain this,” she said.

Labels: ,


Kapita optimistic about future of Zambian poultry

Kapita optimistic about future of Zambian poultry
By Fridah Zinyama
Thursday April 26, 2007 [04:01]

AGRICULTURE minister Ben Kapita has expressed optimism over the future of the poultry industry in Zambia. During the Poultry Association of Zambia (PAZ) annual general meeting at Edinburg Hotel in Kitwe, Kapita said the future of the poultry industry was bright and that farmers should work towards entering new markets in the region.

Kapita said the government would ensure that poultry farmers and industries allied to the sector were given the necessary support to ensure growth.

He also urged farmer organisations to serve their members and uphold fundamental and basic principles critical for their sustainable existence.

“Government commends Poultry Association of Zambia’s vision of doubling the size of the Zambian poultry industry by 2008,” Kapita said. “Your vision for the industry will greatly contribute to the attainment of Millennium Development Goal meant to help eradicate poverty and hunger by 2015.”

And PAZ executive manager Mathews Ngosa revealed that the organisation was working with Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU) to include poultry inputs and products on the bulk messaging system to help broaden their members’ access to new markets.

Labels: ,


Wednesday, April 25, 2007

HERALD - SADC, Neocolonialism, Nigerian Elections

Tanzanian envoy hails Sadc
Herald Reporter

TANZANIAN Ambassador to Zimbabwe Mr Adadi Rajabu has hailed Sadc for the position it took on Zimbabwe last month. Mr Rajabu, who was speaking during the 43rd anniversary of the United Republic of Tanzania, also commended Sadc for the position it took on the Democratic Republic of Congo and Lesotho. The regional body last month held an extraordinary summit in the Tanzanian capital where it resolved to work out an economic package for Zimbabwe and appointed South African President Mr Thabo Mbeki to mediate between Zanu-PF and MDC.

"We humbly recognise and commend efforts by Sadc heads of state for convening the just-ended Extraordinary Summit in March 2007, in Dar es Salaam, for their intervention to review the current political, economic and security developments in the region with a view to coming up with the way forward particularly on the situation in the Kingdom of Lesotho, the DRC and the Republic of Zimbabwe.

"This was a clear testimony of how the region is concerned on the problems emanating in the entire region. We urge the international community to support these initiatives by Sadc," Mr Rajabu said.

He said Zimbabwe and Tanzania had a long history of solidarity and co-operation, dating back to the days of the liberation struggle. "The bond that joins us is deeper than words of gratitude can express," he said.

Ambassador Rajabu said while Zimbabwe and Tanzania enjoyed cordial political relations, a lot needed to be done in the areas of trade and economic development. "We need to do a lot more on economic and trade relations. Our co-operation should be complementary using comparative advantages which our countries have individually, to strengthen our economies," he said.

Speaking at the same occasion, the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Cde Reuben Marumahoko, said Zimbabwe remained indebted to Tanzania for the moral, political, diplomatic and material support received "during the darkest hour in our political history".

Cde Marumahoko said it was the unshakeable friendship and solidarity between the two countries which formed the bedrock of the current excellent bilateral relations.

The deputy minister also called for the promotion of trade between the two countries. "While political relations between Zimbabwe and Tanzania have grown from strength to strength over the years, much needs to be done in the economic sphere. There is scope for our respective business communities to forge viable linkages among themselves in a win-win situation under existing government-to-government arrangements," said Cde Marumahoko.

He said Zimbabwe would always work closely with Tanzania at regional, continental and international fora. "With regard to Sadc, we note with satisfaction the critical role Tanzania is playing in championing the interests of the region under its stewardship of the Sadc Organ on Politics, Defence and Security," he said.

Solidarity vital to stem neo-colonialism

THIS is the first of a two-part series in which STEPHEN MPOFU looks at Western media onslaught on progressive states and the role of journalists in defending the national interest.

THE decision by Sadc leaders to stand by Zimbabwe in the bilateral dispute with Britain over the equalisation of land ownership between black and white Zimbabweans to correct colonial inequities that emanated from the wanton dispossession of the former, as a significant milestone in efforts to enhance regional unity.

Sadc’s solidarity with Zimbabwe that comes with a life line to rescue the country from the economic sanctions imposed by the west in retaliation over land reforms, is indeed, a sign of the dawn breaking in Sadc. This decision was a realisation that if Sadc countries stand together even the most intractable enemy will think twice before mounting an attack on any one of them. Leaders in the region have come to realise, and on time too, that if they are divided they will fall to the enemy one by one like dominoes.

Imperialists are specialists at scattering nations to isolate a targeted victim. They behave like a pride of marauding lions on a hunt.

What Sadc’s solidarity suggests is that anyone within Zimbabwe or outside it, who tries to sabotage the economic rescue package should be regarded as an enemy, not only of this country or Sadc but all African people, and should be handed his/her just deserts. And any other country or countries that hunt with the human predators and then cry copious crocodile tears with Zimbabweans should be exposed, denounced and reined in.

As Zimbabweans celebrate 27 years of their hard-won independence, they do so in high spirits, knowing that they belong in a community in which the security and prosperity of every member has become paramount. Zimbabwe has been subjected to a more vicious Western media campaign, apparently to try to soften it for an imperialist invasion and to warm up other countries for the attack. The media blitz should be viewed as a wake-up call to liberation movements in power to re-gird their waists for a protracted fightback by former colonial rulers.

When the Western-imported violence hit the country Commonwealth secretary-general Don Mckinnon, a New Zealander, wondered if a "squadron" should be dispatched to Zimbabwe.

His was not a metaphorical remark.

Encoded in that remark was a clear message that the war planes would re-enforce the effort of those trying to remove the Government by any quickest, albeit unorthodox, means.

It was in the same vein that Australia unashamedly announced that it had provided funds to the opposition in Zimbabwe for civil disobedience activities also intended to effect regime change.

It is possible the money could have come from ex-Rhodesians who ran away at independence and non-racialism and whose former glorious days in this country still haunt them like deranged spirits.

All the other African countries must also be on the same high alert if they boast any material possession that attracts covetous imperialists’ eye — if they are not already the ‘other’ of the capitalist west.

Perhaps the real shocker was the statement by South African president Thabo Mbeki that if the Zimbabwe Government succumbed to the so-called regime change, next in line would be South Africa, Namibia and Angola which are also encircled in red by imperialists for the same retrogressive change.

The four countries have one thing in common — they are ruled by former liberation movements: Zanu-PF, in Zimbabwe; the African National Congress, in South Africa; the South West African People’s Organisation in Namibia; and the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola.

Western Europe and North America branded all the four political parties terrorist organisations at the time they were executing the armed struggle in their respective countries.

Now in power they cease to be terrorist organisations but only as long as their countries submit to political manipulation and resource exploitation but if the leaders of their governments put their foot down hard, they reactivate the "terrorist" label that is kept latent by imperialists, like anthrax spores.

The message to revolutionary cadres in these four countries is that, at no time should they misinterpret a vicious dog’s smile for a friendly gesture and then lower their guard, which is precisely what the enemy looks out for.

Angola became independent in 1975 under the MPLA at the same time as Mozambique. Zanu-PF came to power in 1980; Namibia followed in 1990 under SWAPO; and South Africa in 1994 ending decades of apartheid rule introduced by Daniel Francois Malan in 1948 when the National Party came to power. After the attainment of independence in all those countries, imperialists remained suspiciously quiet, fearing a world backlash before mounting any regime change campaign.

If we look beyond the brighter to the darker side of the political watershed, it becomes clear that the regime change paranoia is all steeped in racism. When beauty queen Zimbabwe bares her vital statistics at the Commonwealth of former British colonies to protest her shoddy treatment by the club, we hear threats of war planes being rushed to silence Harare and effect "regime change".

On the other hand, when rebels bare their bosoms at her majesty, the queen, over no particular grievance, there is not the slightest hint of squadrons being rushed to Salisbury to tame the rebels and re-instate legality. On the contrary, a head of the Queen’s government declares that no British soldier will be sent to spill "white blood" in Rhodesia.

Now if this does not imply racism, what does?

And while apparently feeling poorer without Zimbabwe’s vital statistics, the Commonwealth is obviously livid at black storming out of it, while the head of the club, Britain, did nothing after the humiliation by the walk out by Ian Smith and his cronies from the Queen’s palace.

Of course, apart from mineral wealth and congenial climate — witness the Eastern Highlands as Zimbabwe’s own Switzerland — the controversial land and the treasures it embraces, imperialists clearly wish to use Zimbabwe’s strategic location as an observation tower over the region.

Remember imperialist Cecil John Rhodes’ worldview from the Matopos? That observation has not been lost on the West. After the whirlwind land reform exercise in Zimbabwe, following the refusal by Britain to compensate whites for land acquired for re-distribution, the Boers in South Africa and their imperialist allies abroad appear to have set land in South Africa as a trap door for the ANC government to hang itself should it make a wrong move.

It should also be remembered that South Africa, under apartheid, was a bastion of racism with whites running away from black rule and democracy elsewhere on the continent tramping Southward to reinforce fellow white oppressors in South Africa.

Among the crabs was a Western spy expelled from Zambia in 1980 for his nefarious activities while on his country’s diplomatic service there. The man later owned a "summer house" in South Africa, which he probably used to plant Western spies, and from which to monitor the "growth" of old "plants" further afield.

It is also possible that the spy informed on the activities of the ANC and of the Pan Africanist Congress both of which and himself were based in Lusaka, Zambia, to curry favours with the apartheid regime. In any case, South Africa has always been regarded in the West as "the First World country in the Third World".

So, obviously the whites in South Africa do not wish to have that first world status altered in any way by a black government. It was under that soft pedal policy that the government of Britain entered into a Simonstown Agreement with Pretoria which, as a colonial power in South West Africa, controlled the strategic naval base of Walvis Bay with some military heavyweights, travelling as far as the United States for briefings with their counterparts.

It was probably because of the close military association with the west that the Pretoria regime, while agreeing to quit Namibia which it ruled under a League of Nations agreement, did not at first yield under pressure to give up the Naval base as well.

It is suspected that the West fears that the East, which supported SWAPO during the liberation struggle in the former German territory might be granted carte blanche authority by the SWAPO government to administer the Naval base and possibly shut out Naval and other vessels from the West plying sea lanes around Africa getting anywhere near that base.

Before the ANC eventually came to power it and the PAC had also battled Hendrick Verwoerd, also a product of Zimbabwe — he went to Milton High School in Bulawayo — who shared notoriety as some of the most repressive rulers with Portuguese dictator, Antonio Salazaar.

Salazaar was succeeded by the military before the socialists rose to power under Dr Mario Soares who flagged off Portuguese East Africa (Mozambique) and Portuguese West Africa (Angola) to their independence under FRELIMO and the MPLA, respectively. The story of Angola is one of mineral riches as is the case with Zimbabwe, on which the Capitalist world wants to feast.

Now should any of these other countries be thought to be about to offend the West by the manner in which they run their domestic affairs, the Western media will zero in on them, as the advance party of the imperialist hangman, to tie up nooses over any of the "culprits."

l Stephen Mpofu is a former Zimpapers editor who, in 1984, went to the University of Cambridge as a Nuffield Press Fellow and did research in International Relations.

Nigerian poll: West exposed

PRESIDENTIAL and legislative elections in Nigeria have come and gone, but what they left is widespread disappointment and more questions than answers. Central to the inquest is whether it is possible to speak of Zimbabwe and Nigeria's elections in the same breath? While we were not on the ground in Nigeria, reports of the loss of over 200 lives in poll-related violence, last-minute ballot printing, theft of ballot boxes at gunpoint and the failure to deliver them to some stations leave us with no doubt that the poll lacked credibility.

Even the outgoing president Olusegun Obasanjo, whose party ostensibly "won" the election expressed disappointment with the process, though he was surprisingly amenable to the outcome. But what surprises us even more is that while all observer missions have condemned the Nigerian process as a disgrace, the response from Western groups and governments has been quite muted when compared to the disgust from Nigerian and other developing world observer missions.

We, however, must emphasise from the outset, that we do not believe that Western countries have any right to bless or condemn any election on the continent, particularly when they do not disguise their contempt for African observers whom they do not even invite to their own countries.

But we would have thought the West, that always masquerades as a custodian of democracy, would join progressive observers in agitating for a rerun. The same goes for Obasanjo who was quick to join the Western bandwagon in condemning Zimbabwe’s 2002 presidential poll which can never be compared, by any stretch of the imagination, to the sham that occurred across Nigeria last week. This is not to say we do not know why US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair seem to have lost their voices where Nigeria is concerned. They have been benefiting a lot from Obasanjo’s penchant to export crude oil, and import refined petroleum products.

Obasanjo also served them well in their fight with Harare when he went against African Caribbean and Pacific voices in the Commonwealth that had recommended the lifting of Zimbabwe’s suspension from the councils of the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth’s gripes, we were made to believe, were over the way the 2002 elections had gone in Zimbabwe, which is also the EU's justification for its illegal sanctions. Today, we ask the same observers to hold the Zimbabwean process and the Nigerian poll to scrutiny, and tell the world whether they have the right to question the legitimacy of our own process. We ask, as a wronged people, betrayed both by Obasanjo and his peers what the recompense will be on Nigeria where 200 lives were lost and a key opponent only allowed to contest just a few hours before the election?

Today, Obasanjo who had hoped to leave the scene under the halo of plaudits, exits amid a cloud of shame, hoist by his own petard. Let the Nigerian experience be a lesson to all, it is not necessarily the credibility of a process that the West is interested in, but the malleability of the regime that determines the Western response. This is why we agree with President Mugabe that the only voices that matter are those of our brothers from the developing world, we advise Abuja to listen to their concerns. As for the Westerners, they can go hang.

Labels: , , ,


DAILY MAIL - Appointments, Vulture Fund

Levy makes more appointments

PRESIDENT Mwanawasa has appointed Chitambo member of Parliament Nassim Hamir as Deputy Minister of Lands. And Mr Mwanawasa has also appointed former Zambia National Commercial Bank (ZNCB) Managing Director Likolo Ndalamei as Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet in charge of Finance and Economic Development at Cabinet Office.

Special assistant to the President for Press and Public Relations John Musukuma announced this in a statement yesterday. In the letter of appointment to Mr Nassim, President Mwanawasa said, “This appointment underscores the tremendous confidence that I have in your ability and leadership qualities to guide this important ministry which I have assigned you. “You will no doubt agree that the efficiency of your ministry is critical if the performance of our economy is to improve appreciably.”

The appointment and transfers are with immediate effect. The office of deputy minister of Lands fell vacant after Mr Moses Muteteka was relieved of his duties to pave way for investigations into the alleged illegal allocation of land at the Ministry of Lands.

And Mr Mwanawasa has transferred Eastern Province Minister, Boniface Nkhata, to the Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development where he would serve as deputy minister. He has taken over from Mr Lameck Mangani who has been transferred to Eastern Province as provincial minister.

And the new deputy secretary to cabinet was relieved of his position at ZNCB when Rabobank of Netherlands acquired 49 per cent shares in the Zambian bank. Mr Ndalamei previously worked for the Bank of Zambia between 1992-1996 as assistant director in charge of economics. He was then seconded to the Ministry of Finance and National Planning where he served as Director of Budget. He was later appointed permanent secretary in charge of Budget and Economic Affairs until June 2002, when he was appointed Managing Director of ZNCB.

Meanwhile, KANGWA MULENGA reports that the Public Service Division (PSD) has appointed Ministry of Lands chief registrar in the lands and deeds department, Fortune Kachamba, as new Commissioner of Lands. Mr Kachamba takes over from Mr Frightone Sichone who is on suspension on allegation of corrupt activities. Minister of Lands, Bradford Machila, confirmed the appointment of Mr Kachamba. “I can confirm that Mr Kachamba has been appointed as Commissioner of Lands. His appointment was done on Monday.

He is an experienced officer who has worked in the Ministry for over 20 years and has also worked with several Commissioners of Lands before his appointment. “The new Commissioner of Lands is an experienced advocate and has a masters degree in land administration,” Mr Machila said in an interview yesterday. Mr Machila said the absence of the Commissioner of Lands stalled work at the ministry. The minister said with Mr Kachamba's good reputation, the Ministry of Lands would now administer land issues according to the public's expectation. “We now want to speed up the handling of land matters that were affected by the absence of the Commissioner of Lands, and other outstanding issues such as giving offers and signing of leases and titles,” Mr Machila said.

He also commended the public for the cooperation rendered to the Ministry in the absence of the Commissioner of Lands. The Minister further disclosed that a national conference on the draft lands policy would soon be held and that several stakeholders and members of the public would be invited to perfect the policy.

Zambia to pay Vulture Fund $15.4m

THE United Kingdom Royal Court of Justice in London yesterday ruled that Zambia should pay US$15.4 million to Donegal International, the Vulture Fund that sued Zambia for US$55 million debt. And commenting on the judgement in an interview in Lusaka last night, Attorney General Mumba Malila described the outcome as good news for Zambia. This is according to the Jubilee United States of America website which also stated that court would determine the share of legal costs later. It also described the judgement as a small victory for Zambia.

The anti- Vulture Fund campaign organisation further said that the injustice of the result could not be clearer.

And Mr Malila said the outcome of the case was a plus for Zambia and commended the lawyers for having fought hard to bring down the amount from US$55 million to US$15.4 million. He said the judgement of such an amount was a plus for Zambia unlike the earlier claim. British Virgin Islands-based International paid US$3 million for a debt Zambia owed Romania but later sued for US$55 million repayment.

The debt originally had a face value of US$15 million, but Donegal International claimed that unpaid interests and other charges raised the amount to US$55 million. Zambia had paid back US$ 2 million, but Donegal International successfully sued the Zambian government on February 15, 2007 in the UK court. In 1979, the Romanian government lent Zambia money to buy Romanian tractors. Zambia was unable to keep up the payments and in 1999, Romania and Zambia negotiated to liquidate the debt for $3m. But before the deal could be finalised, Donegal International, which is part owned by US-based Debt Advisory International stepped in and bought the debt from Romania for US$3m.

Labels: , , ,