Ex- PF commander appeals conviction, seeks retrial
Former PF Inter-City Bus Terminus commander, Francis Muchemwa, has requested the Lusaka High Court to overturn his conviction and sentence, citing an error in law by the subordinate court.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19seEGUYhU/?mibextid=oFDknk
Muchemwa argues that his conviction was based on his failure to submit documentary evidence due to a technicality, which he claims unjustly impacted his defense.
Muchemwa, convicted in 2024 on six counts of possession of property suspected to be proceeds of crime, is seeking a retrial in the interest of justice.
He believes that the failure to present key evidence was caused by the trial court’s refusal to admit his documents.
Muchemwa argued that chief resident magistrate, Davies Chibwili misdirected himself at trial in law when he found him guilty in count 1 to 6 on the basis of failure to submit documentary evidence due to a technicality.
The appellant said he was charged and convicted in six counts of the offence of possession of property reasonably suspected of being proceeds of crime on properties namely; L/26392/M, located in Silverest valued at K2.5 million, L/26395/M, located in Silverest valued at K5.7 million.
Other properties include; Property Number L/28477/ and L/28477/Y, both located in Silverest valued at K2.6 million and a FAW Truck with Registration No. BAR 9058ZM, valued at US$62,000.
Muchemwa further argued that the trial magistrate, Chief Resident Magistrate Davies Chibwili, wrongly relied on a lack of documentary evidence to determine guilt.
However, Muchemwa in his submission argued that the failure for him to discharge his evidentiary burden was occasioned by the refusal of the trial court to admit his bundles of documents to aid his defence.
Last year, Magistrate Chibwili convicted and sentenced Muchemwa to three years imprisonment with hard labour after he found him guilty of corrupt practices worth over K12 million.
Muchemwa was jointly charged with two persons in the name of companies namely Friltech Networks Zambia Ltd and Altitude properties Ltd who were fined K200,000 each.
He applied for a bail application which was denied on grounds that it did not not raise mitigating factors for him to be released.
“As the Record of Appeal shows at pages 188,189,190,193 and 196 the Defence had made several applications to adjourn the hearing on the pretext that some of the pertinent documents favourable to the Appellant’s case was in the possession of the Prosecution, who had seized them in 2022.”
Further, the appellant has invited the court to consider page 197 of the record, at which the defence made an application to extend the time within which to file the appellant’s bundles of documents.
Muchemwa complained that the trial court did not accord him a fair trial having refused him an opportunity to produce documents to aid his defence.
“The trial court took cognisant of the fact that Section 71 (2) of the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act required evidence to show that there was no reasonable ground for suspecting that the property owned was derived from unlawful means,” he submitted.
He further submitted that by taking cognisant of the fact that the Economic and Financial Crimes Court Rules, 2024, took effect after the Appellant had been put on his defence, the trial court should have exercised its discretion to allow the appellant to lodge in his bundles of documents, despite any obtaining technicalities or delays, as such was in the interest of justice.
Muchemwa said the prosecution failed to provide additional evidence to prove their case other than the assertion that he did not submit written reports of his activity.
“It is our prayer that this court sets aside the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court. This is in line with the provisions of Section 327 (1) (b) (i) of the Criminal Procedure Code Chapter, 88 of the Laws of Zambia,” he submitted.
By Lucy Phiri
Kalemba February 21, 2025