IT’S LAWLESSNESS - MAKEBI ZULU
Mr Zulu also said, “The seizure notice is not the one which should enable them to evict someone who is living in the house, otherwise no one is safe, be it a judge or any person. A police officer who simply suspects anything can go and get a warrant and say get out of the house.”
“A restriction notice was sufficient to preserve the property but they went ahead and purported to get a warrant, purported to evict them out of the properties, proudly saying that they had taken over,” he said.
Mr Zulu told journalists yesterday after the court ordered the Anti Corruption Commission to surrender back the seized house to Lusambo, that the court set aside the warrant because there was no directive in the warrant ordering ACC to take possession of the house.
Mr Zulu said the warrant only qualifies to be an affidavit. A restriction notice, he said, was sufficient rather than illegally evicting the family.
Mr Zulu said if such was allowed, no one would be safe because any police officer would get a warrant and serve on anyone, even a judge and evict them.
He also said the ACC would be held responsible for the damage which had been done to the property.
“Honourable Lusambo was keeping some animals. A zebra died. We will hold them accountable for that and other things. It should not be like that. We thank the Judiciary for halting this lawlessness,” Mr Zulu said.
Yesterday the Lusaka Magistrate Court yesterday ordered the ACC to surrender back the over K22 million Chamba Valley property it seized from former Lusaka Province minister Bowman Lusambo on grounds that it was irregularly seized.
According to the order issued in chambers by Magistrate Albert Mwaba, dated May 19, 2022, the subordinate court noted that the warrant of seizure was irregularly issued as an affidavit in support was not filed as required by the law.
He said for this reason the warrant does not serve the purpose for which it was intended. This is a matter between the ACC and Mr Lusambo involving the seizure of properties located on a land in Chamba Valley including plots F/609/E/44/B/3, F/609/ E/44/B/4, F/6O9/E/44/B/5, F/609/E/44/B/6, F/609/ E/44/B/7, F/609/E/44/B/8, F/609/E/44/B/9 and subdivision 50 at Farm E of Farm No. 609.
“Upon hearing counsel for the applicant and respondent, it is ordered that a warrant of seizure dated 13th April, 2022 effected on plot no F/609/ E/44/B/3, F/609/E/44/B/4, and F/6O9/E/44/B/5, is hereby set aside,” read the order.
Magistrate Mwaba stated that Mr. Lusambo’s lawyers had argued that the properties in question were already under a restriction notice issued by the Anti- Corruption Director General when the court issued the warrant of seizure in question and that the lawyer for the state never countered this issue, and thus, it goes without saying that a restriction notice was in force at the time the warrant of seizure was issued.
“From the definition of seizure under the Anti-Corruption Act no 3 of 2012, it is clear that both warrant and restriction notice have same effect. Therefore, applying for a warrant of seizure on a properties subject of a restriction notice was nothing but an abuse of process,” the ruling read in part.
And Mr Lusambo said he had been in possession of the property since 2013 and accused the ACC of forging papers for the house.
He has urged the judiciary not allow anyone to interfere in its operations, saying this was the only arm of government which was there for the people.