The High Court in Lilongwe on Monday adjourned to July 19, 2023 an alleged corruption case involving the country’s vice president Saulos Chilima.
The second citizen appeared before High Court’s Financial Crimes Division Judge Redson Kapindu for plea taking and variation of his bail application conditions.
However, both directions failed to commence as the defense objected that notice for mention and plea were filed very late.
In an interview, one of Chilima’s lawyers, Khumbo Soko, has faulted the state of unpreparedness and rushing arresting the vice president irrespective of not being ready with evidence.
He said: “We feel like we haven’t been given adequate time to study the proposed indictment and for our client to be consulted on the same and for us to obtain instructions from him.
“The court has also agreed with us that given the fact that our client was arrested in November of last year, it is imperative that we should be given disclosures.”
According to the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), between March 2021 and October 2021 in Lilongwe District Chilima corruptly received for himself a total sum of $280,000.00 from Zuneth Sattar as a reward for the said Chilima to assist Xaviar Limited to be awarded the Food Ration Packs Contract Reference Number MPS/SB/16/04/2021 worth $7, 875, 000.00 by the Malaŵi Government for the Malaŵi Police Service (MPS).
But the State, through the Director of Legal and Prosecution at ACB – Chrispine Khunga, has maintained that the matter resumed for plea and directions, and disclosures are served after the said two stages.
“We came here not for disclosures but plea and directions hearing, and there is no legal requirement that we should make disclosures before plea and directions hearing.
“Actually, the law says that before trial, we are given 21 days to disclose, so even those were our arguments. The law is clear that it’s 21 days before trial that we can make disclosures,” he clarified.
Chilima, who is currently on court bail is being charged with six counts bordering on corrupt practices by a public officer, receiving advantage for using influence in regard to contracts and failing to make a full report to a police officer or an officer of the Bureau.
