LUSAKA lawyer Sakwiba Sikota has backed the High Court judgment that dismissed actions by the Attorney General to register and enforce the London High Court ruling that found second president Frederick Chiluba and seven others guilty of corruption involving US$46 million.
Mr Sikota said the judgment was accurate and premised on the proper interpretation of the law regarding reciprocal arrangements with other countries.
He said it was not possible for Zambia to register and enforce any foreign judgment in the absence of the law to support such an action.
Mr Sikota said there was lack of a reciprocal arrangement between Zambia and other countries that allow for legal action against individuals or institutions that were resident in other countries.
The reciprocal agreement between countries allows residents to seek litigation against people in other countries affordably and that one can obtain a judgment and register it in the country where the accused person or firm is based.
Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) president Stephen Lungu said he was still in the process of studying the judgment before he can comment.
On Friday, Lusaka High Court Judge Evans Hamaundu threw out a case that would have forced Dr Chiluba to repay the Government after a British court found him guilty of corruption.
[pullquote]
Mr Sikota said the judgment was accurate and premised on the proper interpretation of the law regarding reciprocal arrangements with other countries.[/pullquote]
Mr Justice Hamaundu ruled that a 2007 civil court ruling in London that Dr Chiluba stole $46 million in public funds during his 1991-2002 presidency could not be registered in Zambia because there was no statute to support the action.
“The question of enforcing the judgment of the courts of the United Kingdom directly by registration under the Act does not arise,” Mr Hamaundu said in his ruling. “I have looked through our laws for such an order and have been unable to find any.”
The Zambian Government has struggled to enforce the London High Court judgment through the Taskforce on Corruption that has since been dissolved.
Dr Chiluba and seven co-accused argued that the ruling could not be enforced in Zambia which was a sovereign state with its own judicial system.
In 2008, the court acquitted Dr Chiluba, who is currently in South Africa for medical reviews of stealing $500,000 in public funds.
He was accused of theft and corruption alongside former ministry of Finance permament secretary Stella Chibanda, former Zambian Ambassador to the United States Attan Shansonga, former Access Financial Services directors Aaron Chungu and Faustin Kabwe. Others were Francis Kaunda and Ireen Kabwe.
[pullquote]“The question of enforcing the judgment of the courts of the United Kingdom directly by registration under the Act does not arise,” Mr Hamaundu said in his ruling. “I have looked through our laws for such an order and have been unable to find any.”[/pullquote]
The State, through the attorney general had contested that the matter be registered in Zambia under the Foreign Judgments Reciprocal Enforcement Act, cap 76 of the Laws of Zambia and the order was granted on July 9, 2007.
Late High Court Judge Japhet Banda had granted the order but Dr Chiluba contested the action on grounds that Zambia was a sovereign nation and that only the Zambian court had the jurisdiction to hear cases involving its citizens.
He also challenged the action because legal costs would be cheaper in Zambia than in the United Kingdom and that since he and his co-accused were alleged to have breached the Zambian laws, the Zambian judicial system was best suited to interpret the laws.
Dr Chiluba argued that witnesses in both criminal and civil trials were based in Zambia. He said Zambia was a country with the most real and substantial claim because that is where the alleged frauds and conspiracies originated from.
[Times of Zambia]
Well am not an expert at the Laws of Zambia,but if the experts in the field articulate that our former president is free then we all need to respect that. I think the judge made his point clear. Mr Sikota is a very good student of the law in the same league as our late president and seems to agree with the judge and I hope people see this case for what it is. The law of the land has been followed.
And just to raise a point of order, I find the motive of LT using Mr Sikota’s picture with the president questionable? Couldn’t you find another neutral picture? All PF kaponyas on this blog are going to look at that picture and think Mr Sikota is compromised and yet that picture was taken when he was confered with the State Counsel title at state house. I hope smart people notice.
Ba Sakwiba Sikota ubukopo!!
Saki want about Roger Chongwes case wasnt it in Zed where it was registered?
why doesnt chiluba appeal in london against conviction? does this still leave him with a tag of a lazo?
I retract what i indicated in 3 am informed that Mr Chongwes case was never registered in Zambia. What am wondering is why our so learned former President took up this case when he knew it was not going to be registered and why Goerge Kunda then Minister of Justice did not advise accordingly and went ahead to prosecute Chiluba when he knew it was not going to be possible. Are you telling me all the money and time spent was done in Vain. Are we now going to see Chiluba sueing the govt for un lawful persecution. Am very disappointed with this case and i suppose greed has won but i dont really know why (evil )should prevail. The money los and stolen was our tax .
tumfweko ku ba soma,lelo tekweba ati naifwe teti tulandepo pa ma topiks nga aya. ba chiluba bena nga kukonka balilufyanya apakulu na pa buta tutu,nomba imisendele ya milandu yabo eyalubene.ba mutembo nchito nga ba prosekiuta ba milandu iyi tabafikile pa chipimo elo na chimbi ba post niuspepa nabo baisa nabo baba nga ba prosekiuta panshita imo ine nga ba jaji ukulakomenta pa mulandu no kususha ba chiluba ukwabula ukukonka ifishinka eicho ba hamaundu na ba jaji banabo bena bafwaya ifishinka noti ukulapakala fye nga sawe uulechita ubuchende
Where was Sakwiba Sikota when this case was taken to London? It is now water under the bridge. He did not render advice when it was needed. People are also forgetting that the judgement is still valid except that it can not be enforced in Zambia.
Time to move on time waits for no one but out of interest does anyone know how much this cas has cost the Zambian people? Why in Gods name did the Govt pursue this case,didn’t they study the matter before proceeding?
Wasted resources time and money! let this be a lesson.
why should the empire of UK impose its ruling on our courts. Can they also respect our ruling in the case of scooner and the zambian lady concerning custody of kids. allowing that ruling to stand will be a receipt to neocolonisation. thanks our judicial system. FTJ you have proved you can fight for what is yours.
Govt refuses to register the Judgement that found Zarare guilty.This does not in no way make him a “prophet” The guy is still guilty of defrauding the Zambian taxpayers.
Sakwiba Sikota may be a very learned and articulate lawyer, but az a politician he iz compromized and so are most of hiz opinionz on political matterz.
so what next…the facts in the london judgement where accurate that the house president Chilumba is currently residing was bought through funds in Zamtroop account,why did chiluba use the very account to fund raise funds for his personal needs when he was a Head od state…is that not embassment?
please cousels reinter the very case in zambia following the very facts of the london court we need our monie
Latest , all roads in Kitwe blocked by Mini Bus/Taxi drivers to force GRZ to repair over damaged roads. Paramitary Police are only guarding road leading to the mine
bane the case is over. undit 74 the same useless eviudence was brought before a criminal court in zambia and at the end of it all chiluba was charged with theft of 500,000 dollars!!! now surely if the london high court claims the man stole 45 million dollars why did mutembo fail to rpove that amount of money in a proper criminal court??? thats because the burden of proof in a criminal case must be beyond reasonable doubt whereas in a civil case like the UK one it is just on the basis of balance of probability. i dont understand why the LAZ does not educate people on these matters
Both Lusaka High Court Judge Evans Hamaundu and Jones Chinyama must soon after the 2011 polls be called to account for their clearly corrupt verdicts. Saki’s interpretation of the law is clearly joundiced and you can see “looking for Kunda’s job” clearly written all over his puke. All who have studied law will attest to the fact that cases that have been decided in other Commonwealth countries can be used as precedent or rather can be pursuasive in similar cases before the courts here in Zambia. This then makes Hamaundu’s verdict very s’tupid. I have always had a thing about Zambian trained lawyers/judges, they are all rotten corrupt.
MMD CHIEF BOOTLICKER# 1.. for you everything you support twalikwishiba,,when you will sucked from MMD thats when you will start saying RB is not good…you will find your…….in action and you will support! Ormai!
intresting
# 13 Thanks for da news.Block the road,noo no no.Best way .DONT VOTE FOR THEM ,SIMPLE…
Let’s stop exposing our ignorance here. My understanding of our laws is limited and as such, i’ll wait to hear from the experts in LAZ.
Lekeni umwaice atusheko achuula pafula. How can a sensible people keep hitting one man for more than a decade? Are we a bunch of bloodthirsty savages? What of the money stolen by the so called Levy Mwanawasa and his tandem of thieves? Don’t champion double standards.
With the little law I have studied in my LLM at City University of London, I think that from the legal perspective this case can be viewed from different stand points; depending on the legal issues one chooses to pick and pursue. The learned judge in Chiluba’s case pointed out that there is no provisions under the current legal set up in Zambia to register such a foreign judgment. Sikota who is also another learned man saw the judgment as fitting. Mumba Malila was only amazed as the post put it.
I am of the belief that in the case of Chiluba which was treated as a criminal case in Zambia. The task force tried for more than 5 years to nail him but could not come up with sufficient burden of proof. The task force lawyers could not convince the jury beyond reasonable doubt that Chiluba was a thief. In the case of Chiluba which was held in the UK and registered as a civil case, the late judge was able to seek the option of balance of probability and found Chiluba wanting. This does not mean that when a foreign court convicts a Zambian abroad and is extradited to Zambia to be tried under the Zambian laws, the accused cannot be acquitted. However, we should also look at the international laws when the foreign courts are involved.
Just recently, a British citizen after a chain of marital problems with a Zambian wife, led a Zambian woman leaving her British husband back to Zambian carrying her children. The man went to court in UK and the court argued that the custody of children was more appropriate and safe in UK than in Zambia. However, the court in Zambia squashed such a UK ruling. These two cases though parallel in character are different in content as one talk about law of custody and another talks about criminal law.
# 1 no rocket science needed for one to understand that SAKI’s bread is buttered by Rupia.
Good Morning
I am not an expert in the Laws of Zambia either but I see it the same way as Mr. Sikota. Those still questioning the dismissal of the case by the London High Court only need to ask themselves why the Lusaka High Court has never procured any legal action against any British individuals or institutions living in the UK?
Unless someone can prove me wrong, I say if it’s good for the goose, then it’s good for the gander.
People, our high court judge didn’t say the London judgement can’t be registered in zambia! The man made it clear that the mode of registration of that judgement can’t be by “direct registration” and he went further to guide the zambian govt that the legal mode of registering that judgement would be under “common law”.This being the case,then we just need to accept the fact that our Attorney General blunndered in trying to register the judgement under a wrong mode.The AG who persued the case can be forgiven but the AG who persued the registration owes us an explanation since we all know resigning on moral grounds doesn’t exist in our zambian politics.Perhaps resigning on immoral grounds would be more appropriate for those with no morals at all!
#6 I DONT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE SAYING BUT I AM HAPPY TO NOTE THAT WE STILL HAVE ZAMBIANS WHO CAN STILL WRITE IN THEIR MOTHER TONGUE
#16, as I stated in my post in #1, am no expert in these matters and am just reading the interesting view points by the experts, and instead of either keeping quiet if you are no expert in these issues, you just decide to attack me. Who told you that am alive because of MMD. I was created by MMD and I live and die with MMD? I can assure you, and unfortunately it will never happen, but if it is to happen that MMD goes out of power, I will still be here. Even if I get fired I will still be here. This government job which you claim I got through MMD just accounts for 33 % of my total revenue. I can take that hit my friend and move on to even quadruple my income. You think I traveled to the US in June to count the stars on the US flag? Am a businessman my friend.
But Sakwiba Sikota nauchuula zoona mkaamba. Since 2006 to date uchili ulelwisha inchito through bootlicking R.B’s big boots. Ebu lawyer ubo uwabupuba, atase. Ukapipa namafi palasti chikamba iwe.
So for all good lawyers, if the provision was there to register the London case in Zambia, then FTJ would most defo been found guilty? In London, FTJ is a criminal, right?
Deja Vu UBUFI uleke!!! Which Kitwe r refering to? Kitwe is as calm as the Kafue river, though running very deep!
#23 Point of correction.There is no such a thing as law of custody in English law.It is Parental Responsibility (PR).
Defending corruption. What a life!!!!!
MMD Chief Bootlicke # 28….ok i understand now..thanks!
& i quote “In 2008, the court acquitted Dr Chiluba, who is currently in South Africa for medical reviews of stealing $500,000 in public funds” I almost thot KAFUPI is in RSA for Medical review for stealing money!
Sikota is just trying to survive. Mohan chased him from the courts like a kid.
#28 Why do like explaining your self too much. Even a two year old kid would know that MMD is your bread and butter. Today you are telling us that you a businessman. Nibu kaponya or tamanga? Dont be in denial you are a shushu and without MMD you are finnished. We know you!
KAFUPI WILL BE SMOKED OUT FROM HIS TEMPORAL REFUGE UNTIL JUSTICE IS DONE……IT’S JUST A MATTER OF TIME…..
Mu zed bakaamba ala mwamingalato EPL yashala lol..
Sakwiba SIkota’s popularity has diminished. He lost elections in Luena badly. He was left out by RB despite campaigning for RB in 2008. So he still needs a Job thats why he is a rented Vuvuzela for the MMD. I had great respect for this man in UPND. I Now know why UPND kicked him out for the post of UPND president, they saw through him as un-suitable and foolish. It has come to pass, they were right.
#30 Kuomboka
Is Chiluba a criminal? He may well be, but not because of the CIVIL judgement in a London court.
As I understand it, this was on “a balance of probabilities” rather than “beyond any reasonable doubt”.
Do we really need couts in Zambia? To serve or to oppress us? To convict innocent lives and set the criminals free?
Sakwiba Sikota is finished politician who decided to waste his time with Politics. As a lawyer i guess he still knows the stuff you cant take away that from him. Just i need to read on the law pertaining to international issues…am being told their is an ACT of parliament on that.
HOLA 32; For your own information there are a number of laws that govern divorce and child custody under English law.
if one is divorced/divorcing parent the point of reference in terms of parental/ children responsibilities lies in understanding child custody laws. Child custody is a term used in family law courts to define legal guardianship of a child under the age of 18. During divorce or marriage annulment proceedings, the issue of child custody often becomes a matter for the court to determine. In most cases, both parents continue to share legal child custody but one parent gains physical child custody. Family law courts generally base decisions on the best interests of the child or children, not always on the best arguments of each parent.
In general, courts tend to award PHYSICAL child custody to the parent who demonstrates the most financial security, adequate parenting skills and the least disruption for the child. Both parents continue to share legal child custody until the minor has reached the age of 18 or becomes legally emancipated. Legal custody means that either parent can make decisions which affect the welfare of the child, such as medical treatments, religious practices and insurance claims. Physical child custody means that one parent is held primarily responsible for the child’s housing, educational needs and food. In most cases, the non-custodial parent still has visitation rights. Many of the religions practicing in India have their own personal laws and they have their different notion of custody.
For your own information the English law on child custody and in terms of court case decisions are replete with such statements that : (i) the children of tender years should be committed to the custody of the mother, (ii) older boys should be in the custody of the father, and (iii) older girls in the custody of the mother. But these are judicial statements of general nature and there is no hard and fast rule. As to the children of tender years it is now a firmly established practice that the mother should have their custody since father cannot provide that maternal affection which is essential for their proper growth. It is also now accepted for proper psychological development of children of tender years as indispensable. This was evident in the recent case of a Zambian woman who lost…
This was evident in the recent case of a Zambian woman who lost the case in absentia in UK but was granted parental responsibility by the court in Zambia.
In Halsbury’s Laws of England, the Law on custody is dealt with by the Guardians and Wards Act of 1890, under which it is a well-established principle that the welfare of the child is very important.
• The welfare of the minor is very broadly defined and includes many diverse factors, notably:
• the age, sex and religion of the minor: courts take into account the personal law of the father). The welfare of younger children is generally regarded as being in the mother’s custody;
• the character and capacity of the proposed guardian: courts usually reject baseless allegations against mothers;
• the wishes, if any, of a deceased parent, for example specified in a will;
• any existing or previous relations of the proposed guardian with the minor’s property: courts do not…
• any existing or previous relations of the proposed guardian with the minor’s property: courts do not look kindly on guardians seeking custody just in order to have control over the minor’s property. But if, for example, the minor’s property is shared with the mother and she is otherwise a suitable guardian, the court will regard the property relationship as an additional factor in the mother’s favour.
• the minor’s preference if she/he is old enough to form an intelligent preference, usually accepted as about 9 years old.
• whether siblings would be divided: courts prefer to keep children united and award custody of both to either the mother OR the father.
• whether either/both parents have remarried and there are step-children: Although the mother’s remarriage to…
saki is looking for a job from bwezani, that is why he can talk like this!
• whether either/both parents have remarried and there are step-children: Although the mother’s remarriage to someone who is not the children’s close blood-relative often means the court will not grant her custody, this rule is not strictly followed. Although the father’s remarriage usually denies him custody, sometimes the courts agree to grant him custody especially when the children’s step-mother cannot or will not have her own children.
• whether the parents live far apart: courts sometimes do not give the mother custody because she lives very far away from the father who is the ‘natural’ guardian. But in 1994 an Uzbek woman living in Uzbekistan was given custody; the judge said modern transport had shortened distances and meant that the father could depart from his…
home in the morning and return by evening.
• the child’s comfort, health, material, intellectual, moral and spiritual welfare: this very broad category includes the adequate and undisturbed education of the child.
However, the mere fact that the Zambian woman and mother of children was economically less secure than the British father, was not a valid reason to deny her custody by the UK court because maintenance is the father’s responsibility irrespective of who holds custody (Rosy Jacob v. Jacob A. Chakramakkal). The mental and psychological development of the minor should not be upset by a reversal of the existing status quo: courts will take into account the likely impact of a change in guardians and the child’s reaction to this change, hence the Zambian court saw it fitting…
to grant a Zambian woman custody of her children.
Nga umusugu waku london kuti mwamulubulwisha ninshi na chiluba kuti mwamululwisha,emulate the libyans guys……..
thats why fye ma blacks will never be respected by a white man……:((:((:((:((:((:((
Thieves are released on technicalities all the time. This one and his wife are among them. Anyway take him breathe easy for now, until a new administration takes over.
Lusaka Times, your picture of Saki with RB is a deliberate distortion of facts on the High Courts Judgement concerning Dr. Chiluba London Case. Saki is a brilliant legal mind and his comments have nothing to do with ULP support MMD is the 2008 Presidential elections. The same Saki supported Mr. Michael Sata and his PF in 2006, no one called him bootlicker. At least the MMD government has allowed the courts of Zambia to decide on Dr. Chiluba’s case whether one is amazed or not. The PF and particularly Mr. Michael Sata said that they would stop the prosecution of everyone being investigated by the Task Force on Corruption for plunder of national resources. “Zambians forget easily” The PF will be dangerous to the laws of Zambia. Others under plunder charges have been convicted under the…
Iwe chi chicala, take your law studies elsewhere! Who wants to know efyo wale pona ku skulu. Reserve and practise those fimo fimo clauses mu class not pano.
it is a naked fact that S.U.C.k as failed in politics hence his alignment with the ruling government. it is amost impossible to trust S uck’s opinion on this matter, the fact is that he is compromised politician as well as a failed laywer. his opinion S ucks. Let him go to he-ll
stop being accademic on the issue CHILD CUSTODY, why are you dicussing paragrphs from law books!!! learn to discuss issues bearing in mind that they are other professionals. this just shows that you are a learners and probably with very little knowledge. discuss issues in language that every can understand thats what professionlism requires!! KURK
MMD chief hassie sucker, ulangunfwisha mung’ani. you look like aba baleuma abantu, ichinso chiletinya. i have felling ni webo kaponya waku soweto market. insala pamenso!!!!
MMD chief boot ……………. yes you a business man and your business is to beat and insult people in political gatherings. i guess you are paid well DA….. A.S.S
Sikuba Sikota, tell us some more. The law firm Meer fimo fimo and the tailor from Belgium were charged with Chiluba. The tailor refunded the millions, while properties were repossessed in Europe, why? because the transactions were traced to the ZAMTROP account maintained at ZANACO London branch. it was going to be difficult to bring an action against a UK based law firm in Zambia for a fraud committed in London. in addition EU laws made it easy for a London Judgement to be enforced in Belgium. Professor Muna Ndulo wrote a lengthy script on why the London judgement should succeed. Perhaps Sikuba Sikota can give us his comments.
As for George Kunda and his philandering, it is not about the rule of law but politics. A political solution must be applied after they are voted out of office.
This case was taken to London courts during the Presidency of an eminent lawyer and you Mr Sikota were already a lawyer. So between now and then what has changed Mr Sikota. Are you trying to reposition yourself seeing that 2011 is just around the corner. I had so much respect for this guy but am sorry hes be very disappointing of late. ZAMBIA THE REAL AFRICA INDEED
Iwe chi sakwiba wabe itole.
The fact is ( 1 ) Chiluba and all Zambians know how much damage and plunder he did
( 2 ) Chiluba knows that he is just on temporary respite and a new administration in the future will bring him to justice, no doubt about this.
We tend to forget that the court has *not* found Chiluba innocent but has just refused to register the case. And the other factor here is that all politicians, both in MMD and opposition, we currently have are hopeless and will be busy lining their pockets to care little when this case gets resurrected! Some even promised to discontinue the case once voted into power…
“The State, through the attorney general had contested that the matter be registered in Zambia under the Foreign Judgments Reciprocal Enforcement Act, cap 76 of the Laws of Zambia and the order was granted on July 9, 2007. ”
…..So what is the purpose of this reciprocal Act ? What is it meant to address?
aba ba mudala, bakopo sana, you will hear next time ati balesapota uyuwine…. thats what politics does. everyone is joining political parties for their betterment of their families… believe me this is what is going on. you are in some position and you feel you can make it better then thats the secrete always for zambian politics. its what you can get from what you say or do if related to the rulling goverment. thats why bob marley said; we gonna chase those crazy bold heads out of town…
Sikota is finished, thank God upnd never gave him the post of party president, they could now have finished the way he is diminishing. The Man cannot even run his own kantemba party only bootlicking to Rupiah Bwezani Banda. Expecting substance from Sakwiba’s mouth is demanding too much. This same Saki use to be the lawyer for those widows who lost husbands in the carbon crash, those women hate him so much because he abandoned them.
BASA KI MULI BA MUSEBANYA I NOW SEE WHY THOSE INTELLECTUALLS IN UPND KICKED YOU OUT YOU ARE SO CORRUPT YOU COULD HAVE MORGAGED UPND TO MMD , THUMBS UP BA UPND
number 2 dont be so useless sakwiba dull?think again he is one of the brightest sons we have unlike sata who doesnt even know how a classroom looks like and you want such a kaponya to be president,wailashya he will never rule zambia worse HH.Just get lost..
# 71, at least even if Sata has never been in classroom as you have put it, is making them guys in MMD scared, because is always telling them what should be done, so let us give Sata- ukuboko
#27 LUBASI, mune natotela sana,ala chaisabipa imisepela yanomba yaisatampa ukufisa imikowa.lelo nomba baisa aluka abasungu.
number 71 MMD will never be scared with sata and he will contue losing elections with court petitions.After all he is a brain child of MMD’s political machinations that continue alluding him to plot 1.He thought he was clever when he was in power shielding others now its pay back he will die old and sweating blood dreaming to be zambian president.who has forgoten his third term on slaughts on inocent civilians with Ester Nakawala and his insistence that UPND is like buttocks which can never find themselves in front? are you exhibiting your idiocy to hve such a short memory to trust this kaponya?
One thing never fails; that while our friends continue to debate progressive notions, we continue to digress from the real issues at hand. Zambia is lawless, for laws are seldom enforced and our leadership is corrupt and it is clear to see. Yet we spend years debating philosophical differences that literally add up to nothing. A nation such as Zambia is not free from the grip of lawless leadership and thus has justifiable reason to elicit the help of a non biased 3rd party for as long as the interest of the masses is put forth.
Iwe chi # 74 (zambian in diaspora) leka ukutumpa. How can u compare that finished SAKI yakumbuyo Sikota with Sata. SAKI is a dead politician with a one man kantemba party & is busy licking RB’s big boots without shame in search of a job.
Sakwiba is right. But Levy had a mental problem even tho’ he was a good lawyer. He made the worst mistake of his life in law terms by taking a former president of his country to a foreign court. The law must be followed. And you haters and full of disrespect go hang!
Wonder how George Kunda sleeps at night after his 180 degrees U-turn on the corruption cases? I am sure he sleeps like a baby licking his serpent-like red lips and resting his head on a bag full of the loot obtained from FTJ and all other shoddy deals since the demise of LPM!!
number 76 uwatumpa niwbo who puts trust in kaponyas.
Ba lazo pa zed bengi elyo aba pusuka muma court nabo bengi. Lets just pray ati FTJ akachite invest isho indalama mu zed so that shikabombe muchalo. Mwiladabwa, pantu most of you who are blogging, maybe 70% of you muli ba lazo
When i read the headline in the Post i was happy that some learned man was finally telling the nation how dubious the judges or whoever is being blamed are. I have thought of Prof Ndulo as one of the articulate scholars at Zambian law so when i saw that he was the one the Post had decided to interview, i was elated. Somehow i am left bewildered as he has just expressed his opinion without buttressing it with the actual statute that would have supported his words. Maybe i am jumping the gun or the Professor hasnt yet found the law that Judge Hamauundu failed to find. Maybe he needs time. As a country we are waiting for lawyers to cite the exact law(s) that this Judge Hamauundu should have used. If lawyers just talk without citing the law then we might as well ignore them.
Ok I understand the law but I dont understand why they had to go to London. anyone explain then what they were doing in UK when they knew it does not work that way. I really thot abt at that time and i wondered why they were go to UK. it was surprising mwe. For if u commit a crime in one country then its that country law they will follow not the neighbour. t.ex if you are arrest for some drugs in some country and their laws says u will be put to death then it shall be so. Zambia can not say we will try the person in Zambia under the zambian law which says for instance 20 yrs imprisonment, no way. U hv to face death sentence in the country u hv committed the crime, simply. So Kafupi is just a lucky bastard. I hate him very much, sorry but I do.
One thing though, even if he does not pay back, Kafupi will never know peace in his entire life. May his life be in shambles for the pain he has caused a lot of in Zambians. God will judge him. I rest my case, Your Honour.
Bo Sakwiba Sikota has said the trueth now .But his trueth has got no use to us now becuase you should have advised the nation whent these case were going to london court.We could have saved some money for developmental issues for our nation Zambia.In some where he must be arrested for seatting on his good advise.He is a useless good layer.
All this proves my philosopphy right i.e. never trust a lawyer, even state council for that matter. See how much money and time this case has caused us let alone the acrimony it has caused our nation.