Lubusha sues state over DEC search, seizure of property
PF Chipangali Member of Parliament Andrew Lubusha has taken Government to court over the search and seizure of his property by the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC).
Mr Lubusha seeks a declaration by the Lusaka High Court that DEC’s Director General has no authority not even under section 52 or 53 of the Act to issue a search or seizure warrant.
In the alternative that Section 52 or 53 of the
Act grant the DEC director general the authority to issue the search or seizure warrant, the said provision are ultra vires the constitution , therefore, null and void to the extent of the inconsistency.
Mr Lubusha seeks a declaration that the search and seizure of his property by DEC officers was ultra vires articles 12,13,16,17 and 18 of the constitution.
He prays for an order of certiorari quashing the warrants issued by the director general and also an order of mandamus compelling the investigative wing to return all the documents and electronic gadgets that were seized from his premises.
He is in addition demanding damages for false imprisonment, trespass to property and the use of the property and documents seized. He has cited the Attorney General as the respondent in the petition.
Mr Lubusha, who is also a businessman, stated in his petition filed yesterday that on August 24, this year, DEC officers went to his home 382a in Ibex Hill, Lusaka with the purported search warrant alleged to be issued pursuant to sections 52 and 53 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances Act. No 35 of 2021.
He claims that the DEC team led by one Ms Kabwe Ng’andwe proceeded to conduct a search for almost an entire day.
Thereafter, Mr Lubusha stated that without authority, the DEC officers seized his electronic devices which include a Samsung phone of serial no.R58542F4LNX, Huawei phone of IMEI 860945047079467, HP VX520G serial no289782-447 together with its charger.
Mr Lubusha stated that DEC officers violated the constitution when they apprehended him without cause and transported him like a criminal in their vehicle, actions that were tantamount to false imprisonment, his right to movement and liberty as protected under article 12 and 13 respectively.