Mary Chirwa refuses to be quizzed

And Ms Chirwa contends that cross examining her on the affidavit filed in support of summons to set aside the subpoena duces tecum to a witness would delay the hearing of the main matter where Mr Findlay, his wife Dissalava and associated companies petitioned that the State unfreezes their accounts.

When the matter came in court last month, the state opposed an application by the Findlays for the DEC to produce documentation justifying the seizure at which point the state plead ed immunity from produc tion of evidence as demand ed by the Findlays.

Ms Chirwa was on April 22, 2022, summoned to appear before High Court Judge Susan Wanjelani to give evidence of the alleged money laundering activities by the Findlay family which led to the freezing of the bank accounts.

The State however filed an application challenging the decision to subpoena the DEC chief and contended it was malafide, abusive and oppressive.

The petitioner accused Ms Chirwa of committing perjury by giving contra dictory and misleading information to a court for the purpose of avoiding to present evidence and docu mentation to justify the sei zure and continued freezing of the bank accounts by the state on allegations of mon ey laundering, which they have denied and challenged in court.

They contended that Ms Chirwa contradicted her self when she said that the Joint Task Force investiga tion team does not exist and at the same time saying the report is subject to public interest immunity.

But Ms Chirwa said it was not the court’s job to try and resolve conflicts of evidence on the affidavits before it at an interlocutory stage.

She said the application to discharge the subpoena is anchored on public in terest immunity, protecting individuals and evidence in criminal investigations.