Government moves into zamtel
By Chiwoyu Sinyangwe, Bright Mukwasa and Kombe Chimpinde
Wed 25 Jan. 2012, 14:00 CAT
THE government has taken back 75 per cent shareholding in Zamtel "fraudulently" acquired by Libya's LAP Green Network in the controversial transaction hatched in 2010 at US$257 million. But former finance minister Situmbeko Musokotwane says the repossession of Zamtel's 75 per cent shares will not die naturally.
And a combined team of security wings yesterday sealed off all Zamtel operations across the country, expelling foreign top officials in Lusaka led by managing director Hans Poulsen, who has been replaced by telecommunications engineer, Dr Mupanga Mwanakatwe.
Meanwhile, the new Zamtel management has opened an account at Zanaco Lusaka Business Centre to provide a window for Zamtel regional accountants to deposit sales and other monies previously blocked by Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC)'s freezing of the company's official accounts.
President Michael Sata said yesterday that he deemed it desirable and expedient to compulsorily acquire the 75 per cent shareholding of Lap Green Network in Zamtel after the government having accepted without reservation the report on the findings of the committee investigating the sale of state-owned telecommunication company.
"The appropriate notice under the law has been given," special assistant to the President for press and public relations George Chellah said in a statement.
"Consequently, the President has ordered the dissolution of the Board of Directors of Zamtel. The Head of State has appointed Dr Mupanga Mwanakatwe, chairman and acting chief executive officer as a first step to regularise the affairs of the company. A new board will soon be put in place to give the policy guidance and direction to management and staff."
He said the government would restructure ownership of Zamtel to ensure Zambians owned the bulk of the shares in a revitalised Zamtel.
President Sata further directed Zamtel management to address the plight of Zamtel workers with due immediacy.
"There should be no loss in jobs except through retirement and attrition while maintaining the highest levels of discipline and respect of law," he said. "Zamtel workers have served with distinction in an area of sophisticated information technology. This has been so from the inception of the company."
President Sata reiterated his "relentless commitment to his duty as custodian of the interests of the Zambian people" and assured the Zamtel workers that their traumas and anxieties would be ended.
But Dr Musokotwane said although the debate on whether government must nationalise Zamtel or not was under the bridge, he was still interested in establishing why the government had taken such a decision.
"I can't speak for Lap GreenN but you cannot expect them to walk away from their investment without asking to be compensated. I do not want to speak for them, I think that is up to them. My interest is establishing why as a government we acted in the manner that we did as far as battles for Lap GreenN are concerned. That is their own internal matter, they can do what they want," Dr Musokotwane said.
He reiterated his demand for ZDA to release its report submitted on Zamtel.
"I know because I was a minister then that on all three counts, the ZDA said something different from what the commission of inquiry has said, so the question is who is telling the truth? ZDA or the commission…," he said.
Asked to counter the argument that officers at ZDA were operating under duress and pressure from government on the deal, Dr Musokotwane who is also Liuwa member of parliament said the same thing then could be said about the Sebastian Zulu-led commission of inquiry.
"Before PF got in government they called the sale fraudulent, remember that the commissioners were ministers so if you say that the ZDA were under the influence of government, why shouldn't the same be said on the commission of inquiry? So let us not politicise these issues. This is probably water under the bridge, but for those who want to know the truth, this issue still needs to be established after all, most probably this thing is going to go to court," he said. "I have been a public officer since 1991. I have worked under the Kaunda, Chiluba, Mwanawasa and Banda regime. Over this period, I have been above board. This is the only period that people are making accusations against me."
Dr Musokotwane also said the re-nationalisation of Zamtel would be a test case for other investors wishing to invest in the country.
And top foreign officials at Zamtel were yesterday expelled from the company shortly after reporting for their "daily routine" work schedules.
The expelled officials included Poulsen, a Ugandan national, David Chetty, chief technical officer, a Malawian of Asian origin, Adrian Hayd, chief financial officer, a Pakistani national and Ismail Dore, senior manager for business planning, a Zambian of Asian origin.
Sources said the expulsion of Dore was a "mistaken identity" as he is Zambian but his "skin colour sold him out".
In an emailed memo to workers, Zamtel chief human resource and administration officer Eve Banda confirmed the presence of state security at Zamtel operations and installations throughout the country.
"Dear all, we are currently surrounded by police presence, please I know this is a difficult working environment but let's endeavour to work as we await further instructions from the Government. Thanks…," Banda stated in a memo sent to all employees about 8:30 a.m yesterday.
Workers who spoke separately confirmed the heavy presence of officers from the security wings who offered thorough screening to employees reporting for work yesterday morning.
"Yes, the cops are screening everything from laptops and just about all personal belongings, and these are officials from Zambia Police, DEC and OP Office of the President," one worker said anonymously.
"But as for the accounts, all accountants that deal with monies from sales, collections on the payment bills, sim Subscriber Identity Module cards sales, and all regional accountants have been instructed to deposit whatever they have collected so far into account number 0030210000008659 at Zanaco Lusaka Business Centre."
And the Lusaka High Court yesterday rejected an application by Zamtel that its quest for a judicial review over the Drug Enforcement Commission's freezing of its bank accounts should act as an injunction if granted.
Judge Evans Hamaundu said in a ruling delivered yesterday morning that while he would grant Zamtel leave to commence judicial review proceedings, this order shall not operate as a stay of execution of the seiziure of the company accounts.
The security wings last week seized bank accounts belonging to Zamtel as part of a money-laundering investigation.
A Cabinet meeting of January 4, 2011 resolved to seize the 75 per cent stake held by the Libyan company, LAP GreenN, an investment wing of the Sovereign Wealth Fund used by fallen Libyan tyrant Muammar Gaddafi in spreading his hegemony on the continent as he sought to rule Africa.
[Fallen tyrant? He wasn't a 'tyrant' and he didn't 'fall'. He was illegally overthrown by NATO, so France and the UK could get a bigger part of the Libyan people's oil. - MrK]
On Monday, finance minister Alexander Chikwanda said the government would take back a 75 per cent stake in the country's sole total telecommunications in a decision made to "restore Zamtel back to the people of Zambia".
Under its previous government, former president Rupiah Banda's influence in abusing and circumventing set government institutions and procedures aided RP Capital to ensure LAP Green Networks bought Zamtel despite not being fit to run the country's total telecommunication provider.
The sale of Zamtel was initiated by former communications minister Dora Siliya and former president Banda's son Henry with RP Capital of Cayman Islands.
The sale saw Siliya's antics and manoeuvres which saw her disregard legal advice of the Attorney General's chambers and often chased top government and quasi government officials who disregarded her sworn trajectory over the sale she orchestrated.
ZDA was "pressured" to sell three quarters of Zamtel to LAP GreenN" despite the Libyan company having failed all three of the mandatory prequalification criteria.
The report also stated that Lap GreenN lacked the minimum three million subscribers as required by ZDA as LAP GreenN had no subscribers to itself, its holding company or its parent company.
The report stated that LAP GreenN had no audited accounts. Despite the government selling Zamtel to LAP GreenN for US$257 million, prior to privatisation, Zambia paid US$120 million for tax shares in Zamtel, and a further US$214. 45 million for investment shares.
"GRZ effectively paid Zamtel US $334.45 million to retain 100 per cent of its shareholding in Zamtel immediately prior to privatisation," the report read in part. "It is most perturbing that the GRZ decided to pay for the 25 per cent shareholding it already owned in Zamtel and paid a total US$334.4 million in what was termed as Tax Shares and a Subscription Amount."
On the other hand, Lap GreenN only paid US$257 million for 75 per cent shareholding of which the government was only entitled to US$42.6 million about 16.6 per cent of the value.
The net effect of this deliberately complicated transaction was that Lap GreenN took over Zamtel as a debt-free company with US$64 million sitting in its bank account with the US$64 million having been provided by GRZ and equivalent to the exact sum of money required for the newly-privatised company's capital expenditure for its first year of operations.
The report stated that the sale of Zamtel was fraught with irregularities in the tender processes, coercion in the acquisition of Zesco's assets, bad faith with the selection criteria, negligence in the management of the account of GRZ net proceeds, and a failure to monitor post-privatization.
The commission of inquiry led by Zulu, the justice minister, revealed that RP Capital was so powerful that it used to draft speeches former president Banda made on Zamtel as well as ministerial statements on the US$257 million sale of 75 per cent of Zamtel to Lap GreenN.
The report detailed that key government institutions like Zambia Development Agency (ZDA) and Zesco made decisions and abrogated their normal tender procedures as well as normal way of doing business because they "may have been under duress".
The report revealed that in some cases, officials who resisted the influence from Banda's aides were dismissed from their positions rampantly.
The report points out a case of Cyprian Chitundu who was fired from Zesco and replaced by Ernest Mupwaya for resisting the seceding of the Zesco optic fibre network to Zamtel to feed into the directive by RP Capital. Chitundu has since been reinstated as managing director of the power utility.
Labels: CORRUPTION, DEC, EVANS HAMAUNDU, LAP GREEN, MICHAEL SATA, RUPIAH BANDA, SITUMBEKO MUSOKOTWANE, ZAMTEL
Read more...
Court throws out Zamtel bid to nullify DEC’s move to freeze accounts
TIME PUBLISHED - Tuesday, January 24, 2012, 9:21 pm
The Lusaka high court has thrown out a bid for Zamtel to quash the move by the Drug Enforcement Commission-DEC to freeze its accounts saying the action was done in the course of criminal investigations.
In his ruling Lusaka high court judge Evans Hamaundu said he could not stay the execution of seizer notices as this will allow ZAMTEL temper with the accounts which are intended exhibits.
Judge Hamaundu says freezing of ZAMTEL accounts was done on suspicions that there was money laundering involved.
Zamtel requested the court to grant it judicial review which would automatically evoke a stay the execution of the DEC seizer notices.
Meanwhile, various stakeholders and members of the public have welcomed the takeover of the 75 percent stake owned by LAP Green of Libya in zamtel.
Transparency International Zambia says the takeover was predictable.
TIZ executive director Goodwell Lungu says civil society organisations and members of the public who opposed the transaction have been vindicated.
He has called on the PF government to exercise caution when managing the operations of the telecommunication company to avoid a repeat of transactions marred with illegality.
And former Finance minister Ng’andu Magande has also welcomed government’s decision to take over the parastatal.
Mr Magande however says it remains to be seen what move the managers of Lap Green will take next.
Meanwhile, UNIP president Tilyenji Kaunda says the reversal of the ZAMTEL transaction could not have come at a better time than now.
He said the takeover of ZAMTEL will send a message along the political corridor that people ought to make decisions in the interest of the public.
Mr Kaunda says it is clear from the government decision that no politician should think og oneself at the expense of public interest.
And former Bankers Union of Zambia president Lucky Beene says the takeover is in the best interest of the nation.
In another development, several Lusaka residents have praised president Sata’s government for taking over the management of ZAMTEL, saying it was long overdue.
Wilbroad Mulenga has observed that the measure will sustain economic development, while creating more jobs by empowering Zambians by owning shares in the company.
ZNBC
Labels: COURTS, EVANS HAMAUNDU, ZAMTEL
Read more...
DEC freezes Zamtel Bank accounts
By Joan Chirwa-Ngoma and Mwala Kalaluka
Sat 21 Jan. 2012, 19:50 CAT
THE Drug Enfor-cement Commission has frozen Zamtel's accounts held in commercial banks operating in Zambia.
But Zamtel yesterday filed for judicial review at the Lusaka High Court over government's decision to freeze its accounts. Meanwhile, Zamtel employees risk not receiving their January salaries owing to the freezing of the company's bank accounts.
Cabinet sources revealed yesterday that the freezing of Zamtel accounts follows government's decision to repossess 75 per cent of the company's shareholding sold to Libya's LAP GreenN for US$257 million.
"That is why the workers are failing to bank the money because all the accounts for Zamtel have been frozen by the government," said the source. "This actually poses a serious problem because the workers may not even get paid. How do you pay workers when the accounts are frozen?"
Zamtel management yesterday morning filed for judicial review before judge Evans Hamaundu over the freezing of the company's accounts.
"But actually, most judges were reluctant to hear that case because of its sensitivity," said a source.
According to a statement in support for an application for leave to apply for judicial review filed in Lusaka High Court, Zamtel cried out that the seizure of its accounts in Barclays Bank and Zanaco would lead to a halt of its operations.
In the matter where the LAP Green Network-owned company has cited the Attorney General as the sole respondent, Zamtel is seeking relief from the High Court to reverse the seizure of its bank accounts.
"The applicant is a private company incorporated in the Republic of Zambia and is a one stop telecommunications company providing fixed telephone line services, mobile phone services, Internet services and other telecommunication services and products," Zamtel stated.'
The account numbers of Zamtel's accounts that were seized by DEC include, 042024000000000042, 3020001240 and 066024000000138 held at Zanaco and Barclays Bank.
Other seized accounts are 0011529, 161271152, 121156695, 0957718, 1213926, 011067026, 011067026 and 011039634 held at Barclays Bank.
Zamtel has sought an order to quash the decision by DEC to unilaterally and unreasonably issue a notice of seizure in respect of its seized accounts.
"A declaration that the procedure by the DEC to seize the seized accounts was unfair and contrary to the rules of natural justice," Zamtel stated in its application.
Zamtel wants the court to also declare that the Act under which DEC seized the accounts, which is the prohibition and prevention of money laundering Act number 14 of 2001 was unconstitutional as it infringes article 161 of the Republican Constitution.
Zamtel also seeks damages suffered as the result of the seizure of its bank accounts.
The statement further outlined the grounds upon which Zamtel was seeking relief from the court in the matter and one of them classified DEC's act as unreasonable.
"In that it permits DEC to seize property without paying compensation in the event that the seizure was wrongful, unreasonable and if the owner of the seized property is not found guilty of any offence," the application read further. "That holding money gained from a viable business duly established by law does not constitute money laundering."
Zamtel went on to argue that the seizure of its accounts amounts to an indirect expropriation of property by the government through its department or institution, the DEC.
Zamtel claimed that the decision by DEC was fraught with procedural impropriety.
"Procedurally DEC should have investigated the matter and accord the applicant its right to be heard immediately after seizing the Seized Accounts," the telecommunications company stated.
"It is settled precedent and a right in Zambia that when proceeding under provisions such as Sec 15 of the Prohibition and Prevention of Money Laundering Act number 14 of 2001 the right to be heard must be exercised by the authority involved."
Zamtel stated that DEC blatantly violated the above principle by not according it the right to be heard and to make representation regarding the seized accounts.
"That further the government, through its department, DEC is acting as the investigator and prosecutor in the same cause notwithstanding that it is a shareholder in the applicant," Zamtel stated in part. "That when arriving at the decision, the DEC failed to take into account relevant considerations such as that the applicant is a commercial entity that is able to show that the funds in the seized accounts are proceeds from business."
Zamtel stated that DEC also failed to take into account that the government, which is the shareholder in the company, sits on the board of directors and was aware of the source of the funds.
"There is no reasonable ground to believe that the funds in the seized accounts came from proceeds of crime for a company which is audited per quarter in a calendar year and both the government and LAP GreenN Network Limited as the shareholders know of these audits," the application read. "Since privatisation the applicant is a viable commercial entity and is able to have the sort of funds in the seized accounts."
Zamtel complained that the seizure of its accounts implies that the company has been operating an illegal business, in which the government was a shareholder.
"The seizure of all the accounts of the applicant will make the company more unprofessional which is not in the public interest as the provision of the applicant's telecommunication services shall be brought to a halt," Zamtel stated.
Zamtel stated in its ground of relief that it would be difficult to meet its workers' remuneration requirements following the seizure of its accounts by DEC.
The matter has since been allocated to judge Evans Hamaundu.
Sources told The Post on Thursday that Zamtel had stopped banking its daily collections due to uncertainties on the future of the company.
Cabinet recently agreed to repossess Zamtel from Lap GreenN.
A report of the Commission of Inquiry instituted by President Michael Sata led by justice minister Sebastian Zulu noted that LAP GreenN must have been eliminated at the pre-qualification stage during the privatisation of Zamtel as it did not meet both the five year minimum telecommunications operators requirement and the national telecommunications network licence requirement.
The report also revealed former president Rupiah Banda's influence in abusing and circumventing set government institutions and procedures and that he aided RP Capital to ensure LAP Green Networks bought Zamtel despite not being fit to run the company.
The report further reveals that that following review of the bid from LAP GreenN, the committee noted serious and critical anomalies in the qualification of LAP GreenN in the preliminary stage which ZDA, their lawyers and their transaction advisors deliberately ignored.
But LAP GreenN chairman Wafik Alshater stated that the Libyan firm would be forced to explore legal options to protect its reputation following what he termed "willful misrepresentation" of the company.
Meanwhile, Zamtel employees are uncertain about the company's future, as they risk not receiving their January pay.
"The workers want to know what their fate is. As at now, things are not okay. The workers were promised that their jobs will not be affected but looking at the way things are moving, it is not clear what may happen tomorrow," said the sources.
Labels: COURTS, DEC, EVANS HAMAUNDU, LAP GREEN, ZAMTEL
Read more...
Court reserves ruling in Sata’s defamation case involving Kunda’s wife, Irene
By Maluba Jere
Fri 11 Feb. 2011, 04:01 CAT
LUSAKA High Court judge Evans Hamaundu has reserved ruling to February 18, 2011 on whether or not Vice-President George Kunda's wife, Irene, should be struck out as a plaintiff in a case where Michael Sata has been sued for defamation.
Sata's lawyers last week asked the court to strike out Vice-President Kunda's wife, Irene, who is the second plaintiff in a case where the Patriotic Front leader has been sued for defamation.
According to a notice of intention to raise preliminary issue pursuant to 0.14 r 5 (2) of the High Court rules, chapter 27 of the Laws of Zambia, Sata's lawyers raised the preliminary issue on grounds that Irene was improperly joined to the proceedings.
“Take notice that at the hearing of the matter on 3rd February 2011 at 09:00 hours, the defendants herein will raise a preliminary issue on the ground that the second plaintiff is improperly joined to these proceedings and should therefore be struck out,” said the defence.
The matter which came up for hearing before judge Evans Hamaundu in chambers could therefore not proceed because the plaintiffs were only served with the notice a day before and needed time to respond.
In this matter, George Kunda and Company as a firm and Irene have sued Sata and QFM Radio claiming damages for libel contained in a radio interview aired when Sata featured on a programme on January 18, 2010.
Vice-President Kunda's firm is also claiming damages for libel against Sata and QFM in an article entitled 'Sata unearths a K3.5 billion scam...as he writes to RB to investigate his vice George Kunda'.
Vice-President Kunda's firm also wants an injunction restraining Sata and QFM whether by themselves and or their agents from further broadcasting and publishing the defamatory words complained of or any similar libel concerning the plaintiffs.
They are also claiming interest and costs. The plaintiffs were expected to respond to the preliminary issue raised by the state by yesterday.
When the matter came up for arguments in chambers yesterday, judge Hamaundu reserved ruling to a later date while the main matter has been adjourned to May this year.
Labels: COURTS, DEFAMATION, EVANS HAMAUNDU, GEORGE KUNDA
Read more...
Regina should not thank Zambians for her acquittal - Milupi
By Mwala Kalaluka
Thu 09 Dec. 2010, 04:01 CAT
REGINA Chiluba should thank those that acquitted her instead of the Zambian people that are shocked at her acquittal, says Charles Milupi. Milupi, who is the opposition Alliance for Democracy and Development leader, said there was nothing for Regina to thank the Zambian people for following her acquittal by the Lusaka High Court on Tuesday. Milupi made the comment in an interview from Zambezi West.
He said the outcome of Regina’s case was not surprising because institutions that were supposed to be independent were beholding one arm in the separation of powers, which was the Executive.
“All the three arms of government must redeem themselves,” Milupi said.
He said the people that had compromised themselves to please the Executive should not assume that Zambians were not watching them.
“Zambians must not cheat themselves that in MMD and its government they have champions of anti-corruption,” said Milupi.
Transparency International Zambia said Regina’s acquittal had not come as a surprise.
TIZ president Reuben Lifuka said Regina’s acquittal seemed to be part of the grand scheme to absolve Chiluba of any corruption charges or allegations.
Lifuka said the moment Chiluba was acquitted of corruption by then magistrate Jones Chinyama, it became clear that a path was also being prepared for Regina to be acquitted.
Meanwhile, Anti-Voter Apathy Project executive director Bonnie Tembo said Regina’s acquittal was something expected.
Tembo said it was obvious that anyone that had dealt with Chiluba would be let off following his acquittal by the Lusaka magistrates’ court.
Regina was on Tuesday acquitted of all charges of receiving stolen property by a panel of three High Court judges.
According to judge Evans Hamaundu, who read the judgment, Regina was entitled to be acquitted because at the close of the prosecution the key ingredient of the charge was not established.
Labels: BONNIE TEMBO, CHARLES MILUPI, CORRUPTION, COURTS, EVANS HAMAUNDU, REGINA CHILUBA
Read more...
It’s not possible for Zambia to sustain itself without donor support - CSPR
By Moses Kuwema
Sun 05 Sep. 2010, 04:30 CAT
IT is not possible for Zambia to sustain itself without the support of donors especially on poverty reduction programmes because the donors’ contribution to the budget has been on the upswing since 2006, Civil Society for Poverty Reduction (CSPR) executive director Patrick Mucheleka has observed.
Reacting to President Rupiah Banda’s attacks on donors and Zambians who are demanding an appeal against Lusaka High Court judge Evans Hamaundu’s decision to throw out an application by the state to register the London judgment against former president Fredrick Chiluba, Mucheleka said there was heavy financing from external sources such that if the donors were to pull out, everything would collapse.
“The 2010 budget for instance of 16.7 trillion almost 19 per cent of that is actually funded by the cooperating partners either in form of grants or loans. The bulk of that money is actually what is used for frontline poverty reduction programmes under what is referred to as poverty reduction budget support where the donors through what they call joint assistance strategy for Zambia, put their resources together and the government identifies the sectors where these resources go,” he said.
Mucheleka said most these funds are used in the health sector, agriculture, education and infrastructure development, adding that Zambia would not go anywhere if donors pulled out.
Mucheleka said the government alone does not generate sufficient domestic resources which could be used as a fallback in case the donors were to withhold the funding.
“So you can imagine what would happen if the donors were to say ‘ok fine, because you are asking us to pack our bags and go therefore we are withholding our support', I can assure you everything would collapse.
And even these projects that are being shown around which the government has actually been boasting about by saying your money and your government at work, most of these projects actually have a very strong donor fund involvement such that if today they were to pull out I can assure you it will be a disaster,” Mucheleka said.
“Much as we appreciate and acknowledge the importance of maintaining sovereignty, I don’t think there is anything wrong with the donors or even Zambians trying to ask the government to be held accountable and transparent in the way things are done because if anything, the government should even be concerned that the donors are raising these issues.”
Mucheleka said donors could help the country in the attaining the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which Zambia had ascribed to because only a period of five years was remaining.
Mucheleka said what even made sad reading was that there was evidence through the government itself under the Auditor General’s report on how funds had been either misapplied or misappropriated but nothing had been done to the culprits.
“What people have been saying is that you must be seen to be taking action against all those culprits that have been cited in the Auditor General’s report both on the road sector and the 2008 Auditor General’s report so that you bring back the confidence. People must see you to be taking action and it does not help to be defensive and start deviating people’s attention from addressing real issues. You want to be coming out fuming or questioning whoever has questioned you!
The real issue is, what are you doing to restore the confidence in the system by way of ensuring that anyone who has been cited for misapplication of funds is taken to book? The donors, just like Zambians, are justified and this is what we have been saying as CSPR, we need to have an informed society, which has access to information,” he said.
Mucheleka said threats would not do in addressing the challenges facing the country such as high poverty levels.
He said there were established diplomatic channels that could be used in ironing out any perceived differences that might exist.
“If anything, statesmanship is all about the manner in which you respond to these issues, the way you handle issues.
Even if you say you will send everyone packing, don’t you know that you have your own diplomats serving in the countries where the people you are telling to pack and go come from?” he asked.
Mucheleka advised the government and President Banda to refrain from attacking people that were helping the country.
Labels: CSPR, EVANS HAMAUNDU, PATRICK MUCHELEKA, RUPIAH BANDA
Read more...
London judgment still in force – British govt
By Patson Chilemba
Sat 28 Aug. 2010, 04:00 CAT
THE London judgment is still in force, British High Commissioner to Zambia Tom Carter stated yesterday.
Responding to a press query on President Rupiah Banda’s scathing attacks on the donors, asking them to pack their bags if they are fed up with Zambia following their demands to have judge Evans Hamaundu’s judgment in favour of former president Frederick Chiluba appealed, High Commissioner Carter stated that the London High Court judgment had not been overturned.
“The London Judgment is still in force. It was not overturned on appeal. The Zambian government won the case. Appeals were allowed only on two sub-sections of the case relating to alleged money-laundering offences by two defendants,” High Commissioner Carter stated.
“The Zambian government have already recovered, in Belgium and elsewhere, substantial sums of money as a result of the London Judgment.”
High Commissioner Carter stated that there had been allegations about a request to extradite former Zambian High Commissioner to the United States Attan Shansonga from the United Kingdom.
“The British government cannot comment on extradition issues. It is longstanding policy and practice that the United Kingdom will neither confirm nor deny that it has received an extradition request unless and until the subject of the request has been arrested in relation to the request,” he stated.
High Commissioner Carter stated that the British government was pursuing the matter with the Zambian authorities on government-to-government channels.
“However, because Mr Shansonga was resident in England he fell under the jurisdiction of London courts. He was tried as a defendant in the above case, found liable, and the Zambian authorities subsequently recovered significant sums of money from him,” he stated.
High Commissioner Carter stated that the British government had supported the Zambian government in the fight against corruption, and continued to do so.
He stated that through the Department for International Development (DFID), over the last 10 years the British government had provided 12 million pounds to the Zambian authorities to support the anti-corruption efforts.
High Commissioner Carter stated that the British government had been following recent statements in the media relating to the London judgment against Chiluba and others.
“We note with concern that a number of false allegations have been made about the involvement of the British government. The facts are as follows: The case against former President Chiluba and others was brought to the London Courts by the Zambian government. The British government had no role in that,” stated High Commissioner Carter.
“The British government have made no public comment on the issue of registration of the London Judgment in Zambia.”
President Banda on Thursday attacked the donors and Zambians who are demanding an appeal against judge Hamaundu’s decision to throw out the application by the state to register the London judgment against Chiluba and others.
He said some Zambians should be ashamed of being agents of foreign countries.
President Banda said if the donors were fed up with Zambia, they should pack their bags and go where they came from.
Labels: COURTS, EVANS HAMAUNDU, FREDERICK CHILUBA, JUDICIARY
Read more...
Rupiah can’t survive without corruption
By The Post
Thu 26 Aug. 2010, 04:00 CAT
Transparency International Zambia has asked honest questions seeking honest answers about what the Attorney General is saying and doing, or rather not doing, over judge Evans Hamaundu’s decision not to register the London High Court judgment against Frederick Chiluba and his tandem of thieves.
There are no indiscreet questions, but only indiscreet answers. So telling lies, half-truths will not help matters in any way. They are not telling our people the truth about the London High Court judgment, judge Hamaundu’s judgment and indeed about their own decision not to appeal clearly questionable judgments. With the confusion that Rupiah Banda’s government clearly wants to create around this issue, one would expect the Attorney General to take a position that is defensible given that he is a professional who should always guide the public where necessary in ways that are clear and not contradictory.
We have said before that every society needs institutions and offices that should be protected from the corruption of politics so that the public can retain confidence in their institutions. We do society a great injustice when we allow all offices and institutions to be politicised in a partisan way. If there has to be any politicisation, it has to be the type that works for the greater good of our people, nothing more and nothing less.
We are not surprised by the position taken by the Attorney General in the on-going debate on whether or not the state should appeal. As we said right at the beginning of this debate, we did not expect the government to appeal because it is clear that Rupiah, for some reason, has convinced himself that Chiluba is a political asset that he cannot do without.
For this reason, he seems prepared to pull every stop to help his political consultant escape his crimes. Rupiah’s determination does not surprise us. It does not appear inconsistent from the line that his government has taken on fighting corruption and protecting our meagre resources from corrupt elements. There is an air about Rupiah’s government which suggests that it is okay to steal as a public servant. And if you are caught, you may be lucky enough to receive presidential protection.
But what we do not expect is professionals giving opinions that may mislead the public in order to justify the indefensible. No amount of sugar-coating Rupiah’s protection of Chiluba will change what it is. It is wrong.
We have carefully looked at the statements attributed to the Attorney General and it makes very sad reading. As Transparency International Zambia has observed, what is the morality of refusing to pursue the registration of the London High Court judgment and yet claiming that it remains valid and will be enforced in other jurisdictions?
Why should other jurisdictions entertain Zambia’s attempts to enforce a judgment but its own courts have refused to enforce? What is clear is that Rupiah has decided that it is okay for these criminals to retain their ill-gotten wealth for whatever reasons. And any explanations that are being given are merely meant to diminish the severity of these disastrous choices that Rupiah has made.
It is important to understand the implications of enforcing the London High Court judgment against Chiluba. If that judgment is enforced, Chiluba would have to leave his Kabulonga home which was bought with stolen money. And this is a fact that was brought out and accepted in that judgment. It was clearly shown that the house where Chiluba today stays was bought with money stolen from the Zambian people. And what Rupiah is saying by refusing to enforce this judgment is that Chiluba should retain a house which the London High Court gave back to our people.
This is understandable for two reasons: Rupiah wants Chiluba to continue being his political consultant and advisor and a bankrupt Chiluba will not have the required credibility to perform that function well. Indeed, it does not surprise us that Rupiah is doing everything to protect Chiluba because he has told the nation before that he is scared of being followed when he is no longer President, meaning that a precedent of a convicted Chiluba whose ill-gotten wealth is recovered by the state is not acceptable to Rupiah.
The question is why? What is Rupiah doing as President that has him worried? The answer to this question was provided by Rupiah himself when he said today is Chiluba, tomorrow it may be you, meaning today is Chiluba, tomorrow it may be himself. It is simply a question of doing to Chiluba what Rupiah himself would like done unto him.
But this is not a good reason to start mischaracterising facts and attempting to mislead our people. In the last few days, there has been a concerted campaign claiming that the London High Court judgment has been discredited by an appeal by Meer Care and Desai, the London law firm that Chiluba and his league used to launder the money they stole from the government. According to the state-owned and government-controlled media, and now joined by the Attorney General, the appeal by Meer Care and Desai has discredited this judgment making it difficult to enforce it.
But if we are interested in the truth, we need to examine the whole matter and not try to do with snippets that will end up misleading our people. Those who are trying to rely on the Meer Care and Desai appeal are either not reading it or they are so determined to mislead that a half-truth here or there does not really matter.
We say this because the Meer Care and Desai appeal confirms that there was theft of public funds by Chiluba and his league. But what it decides is that, because of the use of official government institutions to move money about, Meer Care and Desai, as lawyers, may not have known that the monies they were handling were in fact stolen from the Zambian government.
This is the reason the Court of Appeal excused the lawyers. No one else was excused. And no other part of the London High Court judgment was discredited by the Court of Appeal or any other British court or judge. That appeal only affected the lawyers – Meer Care and Desai.
Chiluba’s accomplices, Faustin Kabwe and Aaron Chungu, tried to appeal but failed. The other accomplices who are based in the United Kingdom, including fugitive Attan Shansonga and another law firm, Cave Malik and Company which was represented by Bimal Thaker, have never been reprieved.
The supplier of Chiluba’s expensive designer suits, shirts, pajamas, neckties, underwear and shoes – Boutique Basile – also appealed and got the right to have his matter heard. When the matter went back to trial, his case collapsed. The government of Zambia is sitting with a judgment of at least US $750,000 of the US $1.2 million that Chiluba spent on clothing that they have not bothered to enforce.
The Attorney General is today telling us that they are going to enforce this judgment in Europe and yet here is an instance where they are not bothering to collect money which is due to our people. What is the reason? It can only be that it is now Rupiah’s policy that these thieves and their friends abroad should not be pursued. Why?
It must be beneficial to Rupiah to let them go scot-free and keep their loot. This is the only way one can understand the Rupiah government’s determination to undermine all the successes that our people have scored in fighting the corruption of Chiluba and his league. And the Zambian people should not be surprised to one day wake up and hear that all the convictions secured against some members of Chiluba’s corrupt regime have in one way or another been annulled either through deliberately bungled appeals or by way of presidential pardons.
It does not matter how much propaganda Rupiah and his minions may dish out on behalf of Chiluba. There are very few people, if any, in our country today who do not know that Chiluba is a thief. There are also very few people, if any, in our country today who don’t understand what is going on with these cases, with what Rupiah is doing with Chiluba and his tandem of thieves.
It is not a secret that Rupiah is in league with Chiluba and that this league cannot be a clean one but a dirty, filthy and corrupt one. Rupiah is in league with a man who had abused the judiciary and other institutions of the state in his attempts to rob the Zambian people of their meagre financial resources. On what else can an alliance be founded between Rupiah and Chiluba if not on wrongdoing, abuse of office and corruption in all its manifestations?
It is also known what Chiluba’s political method and tactic was. Chiluba’s tactics are totally dependent on corruption. This is why to this day, he is not ashamed of popularising the brown envelope – a euphemism for bribery, corruption. These methods have resurfaced under Rupiah. It should not surprise anyone that Rupiah is doing everything to protect Chiluba.
The legal explanations from the Attorney General are nothing but a smokescreen for Rupiah’s decision to protect his criminal friend from losing his house and his loot and consequently his influence, politically and otherwise. But as we have stated before, this should not surprise anyone. Rupiah’s government is not only corrupt, it is going to defend corruption because it can’t survive without it.
Labels: CORRUPTION, COURTS, EVANS HAMAUNDU, TIZ
Read more...
Refusal to appeal Hamaundu’s judgment retrogressive - NGOCC
By Patson Chilemba
Wed 25 Aug. 2010, 04:01 CAT
NGOCC has described government’s not to appeal Lusaka High Court judge Evans Hamaundu’s decision to throw out an application by the state to register the London judgment against Frederick Chiluba as baseless and retrogressive.
Commenting on statements from government leaders that Zambians should accept judge Hamaundu’s decision to throw out an application by the state to register the London High Court judgment that found Chiluba and others liable for theft of about US $46 million public funds, Non Governmental Coordinating Council (NGOCC) executive director Engwase Mwale asked the government to appeal the judgment.
“We take keen interest because this high profile case is indeed a public interest case that should be devoid of political expediency. Government should be reminded that utmost responsibility need to be applied even as the case is being set aside. From our point of view, judge Hamaundu’s judgment, despite its technicalities, clearly provides an opportunity for the due process of the law to be taken further through common law action,” Mwale stated.
“Therefore we find government’s assertions (through Hon Shikapwasha as government spokesperson) that any appeal in this case would be detrimental to development as baseless and retrogressive to justice provision.”
Mwale stated that NGOCC continued to follow the process of registering the London judgment against Chiluba and others in the Zambian court of law, with not just keen interest, but also mindful of its broad repercussions on ordinary Zambian citizens.
She stated that the case involved colossal sums of money in millions of US dollars, which could greatly benefit the majority of women and children who were currently disadvantaged in many areas of social development.
“We bring to the fore the challenges faced in the health sector and government’s procuring of a loan of $53 million for un-prioritized mobile hospitals. Surely this state of affairs cannot be allowed to pass without adequate attention to how much resources would be sipping through Zambian hands if this case is not followed through,” Mwale stated.
“The legal costs incurred in this case are another issue requiring holistic attention in deciding an appeal - and immediately so.”
Mwale stated that it was evident that the validity of the London High Court judgment was not in contention at this point, but that there was an opportunity to take the process further.
“It is our expectation as NGOCC that the Attorney General recognises this fact and institute the appeal process against this case given the various merits highlighted,” Mwale stated.
She wondered why those in government were now backtracking from registering the judgment when they were the ones who successfully won the case for the Zambians in London.
“This is what we refer to when we talk about accountability. We agreed with government when they lifted Chiluba’s immunity. The government should now show the same zeal they showed when the registered the London judgment by appealing the judgment,” said Mwale.
Labels: CORRUPTION, ENGWASE MWALE, EVANS HAMAUNDU, JUDICIARY, NGOCC
Read more...
Living in a fool’s paradise
By The Post
Tue 24 Aug. 2010, 04:00 CAT
THERE’S so much rhetoric about the nobility or sacredness of the work of the judiciary. And an impression is being created that it is a sin to criticise or voice out displeasure about the work and conduct of our judges and magistrates.
Those who try to voice out their criticism or displeasure about the way our judiciary is being run are painted black and are sometimes ruthlessly silenced in all sorts of ways. It would seem that to accept and praise everything that the judiciary is doing is divine but to disagree and question anything that they are doing is a crime.
Citizens must praise the judiciary and accept their decisions without question or criticism. And if any criticism is made, it must be in a rhetorical or academic manner – it should have no effect on the way things are done. But anyone who performs a function that affects other people’s lives must be prepared to be accountable to those people. Accountability is a requirement that we normally associate with those who are in elective office such as politicians.
But we make a mistake if we limit the requirement for accountability to politicians. It is good for politicians to be accountable, but it is necessary also that everybody who performs a public function be accountable.
Accountability is an important aspect of any kind of human relations. Even in our homes, we have to be accountable to our families, even to children who are dependent on us. When things are wrong in the home, we have to be prepared to explain to all the affected if we are running a functioning family.
If accountability can be required in a home, how about in the performance of a public function with the importance that the judiciary has? We are saying this because an impression is sometimes created that the judiciary, which is supposed to be independent, is self-regulating and, therefore, not accountable to the public.
This impression is fortified by the tendency of the judiciary to appear insular and insensitive to the demands of the people it is meant to serve. This, as we have said before, is a recipe for disaster. But it is not only the judiciary that seems to believe that being insular is a virtue.
We have seen this same problem with other constitutionally protected offices such as the Director of Public Prosecutions and even the director general of the Anti Corruption Commission. This is the same attitude that we seem to see with the office of the Attorney General. All these offices are meant to serve the people, and in that regard, they should be responsive to the people.
And where they fail to respond favourably to the demands of our people, they must be able to explain in an honest and principled manner why a given demand of the people should not be made. Partisan political considerations are not part of the reasons that a self-respecting servant of the people should use as a foundation for denying the people what is duly theirs.
Public servants must be brought to understand that the supreme test of their words and deeds is whether they conform with the highest interests and enjoy the support of the overwhelming majority of the people. Anybody who makes decisions on behalf of the people should not cheat themselves that they are free to do as they please.
They may get away with arbitrariness in the short term but a time always comes when their decisions are subjected to scrutiny; if not by their peers, certainly by history. Public servants, unlike our politicians, should be the most far-sighted, the most self-sacrificing, and the least prejudiced in sizing up situations.
They should set an example in being practical as well as far-sighted. And only far-sightedness can prevent them from losing their bearings in the service of their people.
They should also set an example by at all times being pupils of the masses as well as their teachers. They should never be opinionated or domineering, thinking that they are good in everything while others are good in nothing.
They must listen attentively to the views of the people and let them have their say. If what they say is right, they ought to welcome it, and they should learn from their strong point.
If it is wrong, they should let them finish what they are saying and then patiently explain things to them. There’s a good principle that every self-interested public servant must keep in mind. We don’t mean this in any negative sense. We are talking about being self-interested in a positive sense.
That is being concerned about one’s image and legacy after they have left the office they occupy. That principle is to treat everything that one does as though you are going to be questioned about it by someone who was not involved in your decision making. In other words, when you perform a public function, you must be conscious that other people are going to interrogate everything you have done, criticise it and more often than not, try to find fault with it.
This is the nature of public accountability. And because of this, public servants must be ready at all times to stand up for the truth, because truth is in the interest of the people; public servants must be ready at all times to correct their mistakes, because mistakes are against the interest of the people.
They must always go into the whys and wherefores of anything, use their own heads and carefully think over whether or not it corresponds to reality and is really well founded; on no account should they follow blindly.
We believe that when the best opinions, the opinions of the most competent men and women, the most capable men and women, are discussed and subjected to open criticism, they are cleansed of their vices, of their errors, of their weaknesses, of their faults.
This is the spirit that moves us to make criticism. We also believe that it is this same spirit that makes many of our people question or criticise the decisions, actions and conduct of their public servants, including those of their adjudicators.
It is therefore not ill will or malice that moves them; or an intention to bring about a change of opinion, to create an unfavourable opinion in regard to any public servant.
On the contrary, no citizen of goodwill would want to expose a good public servant, a judge, a magistrate to blame and to the scorn to which bad methods, bad decisions, bad conduct will expose them.
Criticism is made simply to overcome these bad methods, bad decisions, errors and all the negative things a public servant can do so that they may free themselves from them and deliver efficiently, effectively and in an orderly manner the services our people legitimately expect from them. We might appear to be too harsh in our criticism of public servants. We feel it is necessary to be so; it is healthy to be so.
And rather than be like that woman who they say kept on looking – who the Bible says – kept on looking toward that lake, towards that city which had sunk, and who was changed into a pillar of salt, we must look forward.
We shouldn’t allow ourselves to be changed into a pillar of salt. That is the only proper attitude for us to have, which all honest men and women should have, which all honest public servants should have without reservation of any kind, without regrets of any kind.
Our judges and other public officials who exercise constitutionally protected powers should know that they need to be sensitive to what our people want; they need to mull over things and listen to the people’s feelings.
As we have said, it is not far-fetched to think that a time could come when judge Evans Hamaundu will be asked why he decided the way he did; why he kept quiet about his previous decision.
This kind of accountability is not impossible and it may indeed come. They may spend many sleepless nights trying to find a way to justify this clearly unjustifiable act. But this will be time wasted. The best thing – and the easiest thing – is simply to accept that something seriously wrong has happened and needs to be corrected.
There are also people like Jones Chinyama – that magistrate who decided to convict Frederick Chiluba’s accomplices and acquit him, making inexplicable distinctions between criminal activities that could not be distinguished – who may have to give an account. This is the mind that our public servants need to have. This is the far-sightedness we are talking about.
We have people like Director of Public Prosecutions Chalwe Mchenga, who today cannot explain truthfully what he did in the case of Kashiwa Bulaya. Were he to be challenged on this, we have no doubt that his only defence would be to point an accusing finger at George Kunda.
And also if Mchenga was today to be asked to truthfully explain his withdrawal of the appeal against Chiluba’s acquittal by Chinyama, his only defence would also be to point an accusing finger at Rupiah Banda in addition to George.
Whatever the case, all those who exercise public authority must live in the constant expectation of a day of accountability. Doing otherwise is to live in a fool's paradise.
Labels: CORRUPTION, EVANS HAMAUNDU, JONES CHINYAMA, JUDICIARY
Read more...
Hamaundu’s judgment has left a bad taste in the mouth - Mpombo
By Kombe Chimpinde
Tue 24 Aug. 2010, 14:20 CAT
THE High Court decision to reject the registration of the London judgment leaves a bad taste in the mouths of Zambians, Kafulafuta member of parliament George Mpombo has said.
And Mpombo has observed that
President Rupiah Banda's attempts to shield those close to him from facing the law is a miscalculated move that will only badly inconvenience them.
Reacting to President Banda's statement yesterday that government would not appeal against the High Court ruling rejecting the registration of the London judgment, Mpombo told Post Online that President Banda had totally no regard for Zambians.
“It is a decision that has got to be challenged. If this government claims to be a government that observes good governance and the rule of law, let him move to the next level and appeal. It is surprising to see Rupiah saying we are not going to appeal, it tells us that he has now taken up the legal role of government,” Mpombo charged
“We were expecting to see the DPP addressing people on the matter but he is just quiet. You know shielding Chiluba from facing the law by blocking the DPP from appealing is not helping the nation.”
Mpombo who said the judgment left a bad taste in the mouths of Zambians has called on Zambians to demand that the government immediately appeals the decision stressing that government may continue frustrating Zambians.
“...Banda has no regard for the people Zambia. We don't have a leader who is servant of the people. We have king Banda, he has assumed the role of kingship and that is making him behave as though he is untouchable,” he said.
Mpombo cited an examples of how government was so quick to take action on cases that concerned the opposition or anyone opposed to government positions.
Commenting on Zambia Police Service’s reluctance to apprehend gender in development minister Lucy Changwe, Mpombo said that the police’s sluggish response was as a result of the influence of President Banda.
“Banda cannot say he does not control the police. If he does not control the police what is the answer for the police's sluggish response on the matter,” he questioned.
“ I can tell you that I paid Findlay and the DPP confirmed that the case had been dropped but I was shocked later on just to be told that the case on.”
He observed that currently there were different sets of laws for different individuals.
“So you would understand why Father Frank Bwalya is calling for countrywide demonstrations. It’s understandable and justifiable as people are frustrated,” he said.
Mpombo charged that the police service was under President Banda’s armpit and as such was dictating the pace of the prosecution of cases.
“What Banda is doing (protecting plunderers) is an act in futility as he is inconveniencing these people. It is better to allow them face the consequences of their actions. What will they do when a new government is voted into power,” he said.
“Banda's recent hollow, baseless and bankrupt statements clearly indicates that he is protecting former president Frederick Chiluba,” he said.
Meanwhile Citizens Forum executive director Simon Kabanda has backed calls by Fr Bwalya to hold peaceful countrywide demonstrations to press government to appeal judge Evans Hamaundu’s ruling which rejected the registration of the London High Court judgment that found Chiluba and others liable of stealing US $46 million in public funds.
“..this government has taken Zambians for granted and I think it’s time for Zambians to show government that Zambians can stand up for what they strongly believe is the right thing for this nation,” said Kabanda.
Labels: EVANS HAMAUNDU, GEORGE MPOMBO, JUDICIARY
Read more...
Hamaundu’s decision amounts to indiscipline - Chongwe
By George Chellah
Mon 23 Aug. 2010, 04:00 CAT
DR Roger Chongwe has observed that Lusaka High Court judge Evans Hamaundu’s decision to refuse to register the London High Court judgment amounts to indiscipline of the highest order.
In a letter to The Post dated August 20, 2010, Dr Chongwe, who is a prominent Lusaka lawyer and former minister of justice, expressed displeasure with judge Hamaundu’s ruling on the registration of the London High Court judgment against Frederick Chiluba and others.
“Dear Sir, Re: Refusal to register a judgment of the London High Court of Justice in Zambia. Like the former Attorney General, Mr Mumba Malila, I find it awful to comment on the decision of the Zambian High Court judge refusing to register a sealed copy of the judgment of the London High Court of Justice,” Dr Chongwe stated.
“Awful in the sense that in the whole of my practicing life as a lawyer before the courts in Zambia decisions of the High Court of Justice in London and our own decisions of the High Court have been registered for enforcement in each other’s jurisdictions.”
Dr Chongwe stated that in other jurisdictions of the commonwealth a government would appoint a tribunal to investigate whether or not the conduct of the judge amounts to misbehaviour.
“Coming to the decision of the High Court judge refusing without any discernable cause to register a regular judgment of the High Court of Justice; this of course amounts to indiscipline of the highest order.
In other jurisdictions of the Commonwealth, a government would appoint a tribunal to investigate whether or not the conduct of the judge amounts to misbehavior warranting the sack altogether from the judiciary!
However, in Zambia the tragic decline in standards of judicial accountability leave it clear that this even if it were to take place it would in all probability be a complete waste of time,” he said.
Dr Chongwe stated that he was admitted to practice as a lawyer in Zambia on June 30, 1969.
“And as a barrister, solicitor and proctor of the Supreme Court of Western Australia and the High Court of Australia on the 23rd December 1968. I took silk from private practice (became State Counsel) in Zambia on the 17th May 1985.
I am currently the longest serving and still practicing State Counsel in Zambia. As in recent times I have been contradicted by various people including the highly unqualified through this newspaper I believe I am obliged to state some of my qualifications to comment on legal matters,” Dr Chongwe stated.
“My other credentials include serving as the chair of the Law Association of Zambia for five years (1981-86), I was elected president of the African Bar Association for 6 years and the only African lawyer ever to have been elected and served as secretary general and president of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (1986-1993).
I continue serving on committees of international legal organizations.
“The United Kingdom is one of the member states of the Commonwealth and so is our own country. In the Commonwealth we have protocols and conventions that bind our respective countries as member states.
This binding obligation to international protocols and conventions through our membership of international organizations includes protocols and conventions we have signed with the United Nations organization and with the African Union.”
He stated that the Attorney General is a key player in these treaty obligations.
“It has never been the duties of a minister of propaganda (in this country called minister of information) to respond to legal issues affecting the performance of lawyers in the Attorney General’s chambers or legal issues affecting the people of Zambia. We have a minister of justice who is answerable to our people in the National Assembly.
The only exception is the minister of foreign affairs when it comes to the supervision of international affairs relating to treaty obligations,” stated Dr Chongwe stated.
“It is however disquieting that in the conduct of legal affairs by the current administration; unheard of in previous administrations, one has noticed politicians that have nothing to do with legal matters occupying centre stage in responding to these issues on behalf of the government.
The question one would like to ask; have the minister of justice and the Attorney General abdicated their official functions?”
Labels: EVANS HAMAUNDU, FREDERICK CHILUBA, JUDICIARY, ROGER CHONGWE
Read more...
