Maravi

Chiluba’s acquittal and 2011 elections

Chiluba’s acquittal and 2011 elections
By The Post
Sun 13 June 2010, 04:00 CAT

No honest new government of this country will not take Frederick Chiluba back to court for his corruption.

We understand and appreciate the position taken by the opposition Patriotic Front and as announced by the party spokesperson Given Lubinda that Chiluba will surely go to prison for corruption once his friend Rupiah Banda is out of office. And we have no doubt Chiluba also knows very well that if next year Rupiah is out of power, he will not escape prison.

This is understandable because Chiluba knows that his acquittal was not straight, was questionable and can only be said to have been procured in a corrupt manner. Even the sustenance of that acquittal is also by corrupt means.

We say this because after his acquittal by magistrate Jones Chinyama - an acquittal that has been found wanting by so many people - the Director of Public Prosecutions went and withdrew the appeal against Chiluba’s acquittal that was legitimately filed by the prosecutor.

The DPP falsely claimed that the appeal was filed without his permission when he knew very well - from a judgment that was issued by judge Mwanamwambwa in a matter in which the DPP was involved – that there was no such permission needed by a prosecutor from him. He simply lied to justify a corrupt act.

The grounds of appeal against the acquittal of Chiluba were found to be sound by every honest person, including the Law Association of Zambia which consequently demanded for the DPP’s resignation.

This is not an acquittal that can be sustained. Moreover, everyone who was accused with Chiluba had been convicted. Even Chiluba’s own wife has been convicted for receiving stolen money from him. Even in the civil case that was taken by the Zambian government to recover stolen money from Chiluba and his friends, he was found wanting and has been ordered to pay back to the Zambian people that which he had stolen.

How can anyone sustain Chiluba’s acquittal in these circumstances? It is said that nothing that comes from corruption and dishonesty will last; “whatever you get by dishonesty you may enjoy like the finest food, but sooner or later it will be like a mouthful of sand” (Proverbs 20: 17).

The issue of Chiluba’s corruption and his acquittal and protection by Rupiah will certainly become an issue in next year’s elections. And the honesty of any politician and political party will be judged by what position they take on this score.

As for Rupiah and MMD, they are already in the political dock over the corrupt way they have kept the Zambian people from receiving justice over the money Chiluba stole from them. What awaits Rupiah is a legal investigation over how he and his friends conspired to defeat the course of justice by corruptly procuring Chiluba’s acquittal and sustaining this by their refusal to have Chinyama’s judgment appealed.

This is a matter over which Rupiah will lose his immunity and will be investigated and prosecuted for corruption. And today Rupiah is protecting the DPP but tomorrow there will be no such protection and he too will have to account for his role in this criminal scheme to defeat the course of justice. Magistrate Chinyama has all the immunity to do his job. Yes, he has the immunity, but for honest things only.

And in doing his job, he has the immunity to make wrong judgements but he has no immunity whatsoever to make corrupt decisions. His role in what appears to be a clearly corrupt acquittal of Chiluba will have to be investigated and if he is found wanting, he will be prosecuted for corruption like anybody else. There is no one above the law.

And there is no immunity without limit. The immunity our judicial officers enjoy is not for corruption, it is for honest decisions. And there is need to make sure that this immunity and its limitations are clearly understood by all our people involved in the administration of justice in this country. There will be no justice to talk about if we allow corruption to take root in the administration of justice. There has to be accountability and openness in the way justice is administered in this country.

Nothing should be done in the darkness of secrecy and protected by immunities. In the darkness of secrecy and under the cloak of judicial immunities, sinister interests and evil in every shape have full swing. Only in proportion as publicity and accountability has place can any of the checks applicable to judicial injustice operate. Where there is no publicity and judicial accountability, there is no justice. Publicity and judicial accountability are the very soul of justice.

It is the keenest spur to exertion and the surest of all guards against improbity. It keeps our judicial officers, our magistrates and our judges themselves while trying under trial. A magistrate or judge’s knowledge that his or her conduct on the bench is under observation and may be questioned for elements of corruption offers a strong incentive to avoid any perception of corruption, of bias and to ensure that trial fairness is respected. Justice is a process fundamental to civil society.

The citizen who is wronged seeks reparation through the justice system. It is essential that the system is corruption-free if the process is to function. It is therefore impossible to have a respected judicial process or justice system if people believe it is corrupt. Corruption in our judicial process should be eliminated if public confidence in the justice system is to be maintained. If clearly corrupt decisions like the one we have seen over Chiluba’s case are permitted, public confidence in the administration of justice would be seriously undermined and probably the administration of justice in this country would be seen to be an act of collective credulity rather than reason.

And the courts have a duty through the way they conduct their business to preserve public confidence in the justice system, not egoistically to protect the power of the judiciary, but as a necessary and key element of maintaining the rule of law. It is essential to a democracy and crucial to the rule of law that the courts are seen to be free from making corrupt decisions.

The rule of law cannot exist without an independent judiciary, a judiciary that is not corrupted by those in power and those with deeper pockets to uphold its authority. It is also directly dependent on the ability of the courts to maintain their dignity and respect by not being seen to be tools of those in power, of those at State House and their friends. The general acceptance of judicial decisions, by citizens, which is essential for the peace, welfare and good governance of the community, rests, not upon coercion, but upon public confidence.

The way Chiluba’s case has been handled undermines public confidence in our judicial process. Here there is a case which every honest and objective person believes was not handled properly by the magistrate and the matter is accordingly appealed by the prosecutor but the President, in clear connivance with the DPP, withdraws the appeal. And all is quiet from our magistrates, judges and their associations. Of course, they are talking about the matter in the corridors but no open position is taken to assure society that all is not lost.

The Law Association of Zambia questions the way this matter has been handled and asks the DPP to resign, nothing happens – all is quiet! What type of public confidence are we seeking in our judicial process?

It is therefore right for the politicians in the opposition to take it upon themselves and declare that when they come to power this matter will go back to the courts to be decided upon in a manner that will not only satisfy the Zambian people, but will also help to improve the standing of our whole judicial process. It is therefore acceptable that the PF has put Chiluba’s acquittal and the refusal by Rupiah to appeal the matter as a campaign issue in next year’s elections.

Labels: 2011 ELECTIONS, CHILUBA

posted by MrK @ 4:40 AM