Melo News | Thursday, February 22, 2024 | Lusaka
Former First Lady Esther Lungu has made a request to the Economic and Financial Crimes Court to halt her corruption case so that she can challenge one of its rulings.
She had initially asked the court to refer her case to the Constitutional Court to determine whether the Chief Justice has the power to establish the EFCC as a division of the High Court through a statutory instrument.
Esther argued that there is a distinction between a specialized court and a division of the High Court. However, Judge Pixie Yangailo, speaking on behalf of Mwanajiti Mabbolobbolo and Vincent Siloka, stated that the court is only obligated to refer a question to the Constitutional Court if it meets the necessary threshold.
The judge also dismissed Esther’s application for a stay of proceedings, stating that she should have petitioned the Constitutional Court for redress. Additionally, the court expunged certain paragraphs from Emmanuel Khondowe’s affidavit, citing a violation of the High Court Rules.
Esther had also raised a preliminary issue regarding Khondowe’s involvement in the case, but the judge ruled that he had the necessary knowledge and standing to depose to the affidavit.
The Court responded to Esther’s argument that Khondowe is not qualified to analyze her financial status and draw conclusions about the tainted property by stating that the former First Lady has the right to challenge the findings of the investigations officer. Judge Yangailo emphasized that the court will base its decision on the facts presented and is not obligated to rely solely on the evidence of a qualified individual. The judge ruled that it is not necessary to initiate criminal proceedings or prove the tainted nature of the 15 double storey houses before considering non-conviction based forfeiture. The focus of the determination lies within the application itself.
Judge Yangailo further stated that if Esther is found to be lacking in her claims, she will have the opportunity to prove the legitimacy or her interest in the alleged tainted properties. The main case is scheduled for March 21, 2024, but Esther has expressed her intention to challenge the decision before the Court of Appeal due to her dissatisfaction with the ruling. In an affidavit supporting her ex-parte summons for an order to stay proceedings, Esther argued that her appeal may become irrelevant if the main case proceeds next month. She also raised concerns about her right to a fair trial potentially being infringed upon.
Esther contended that the jury made errors in their ruling, specifically in considering the specialized Court as a division of the High Court, and in determining that the case was properly commenced. She also claimed that the Court failed to address her application to set aside the case for irregularity, both in law and in fact. In this particular case, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has requested the Court to penalize Esther by forfeiting her 15 semi-luxurious houses, valued at K41.5 million, on the grounds that they were acquired through illegal means.
