
07/08/2024
Pls follow ZED Insight 🙏
LUSAKA Chief resident magistrate Davies Chibwili has thrown out an application by jailed Patriotic Front cadre Francis Muchemwa, alias Commander II, requesting him to suspend an order to forfeit some of his properties.
With the dismissal of the application, the State can go ahead and forfeit the properties they need which were seized from the convict.
This is in a case Muchemwa and two of his companies, Friltec and Altitude Limited, were accused of possesion of property suspected of being proceeds of crime.
Further, Muchemwa was accused of getting K141,400 subsistence allowances from the Zesco, where he worked as a security officer, but he never had prove that he was entitled to the money since he had no documents showing that he traveled.
The court found the accused guilty of the charges and jailed Muchemwa for three years imprisonment with labour and fined his companies K200,000.
The Anti Corruption Commission(ACC) later applied that some of the properties in issue be forfeited to the State, a plea magistrate Chibwili granted.
But Muchemwa’s lawyers applied that the forfeiture order granted by the court be suspended, contending that the ACC has instituted proceedings in the High Court seeking forfeiture of the same properties in issue.
However, the ACC asked the court to dismiss Muchemwa’s application because substantive issues regarding the proceedings have all been determined, including forfeiture.
In his ruling yesterday, magistrate Chibwili dismissed the application.
“I have taken into consideration both sides[defence and the State] and I have also read section 331 of the Criminal Procedure Code of which the application has been anchored.The property under question has been under the custody of the state from when the convicts were arrested.
“The question I ask myself is what would be the point of suspending the order if the property will still be in the custody of the state?” magistrate Chibwili said.
He added that “This is a conviction based on the forfeiture. Unless the conviction is impugned, the order will follow. The applicant’s application is therefore declined as it will not serve any purpose. The earlier order still stands”.
Follow ZED Insight for more news updates