FAZ LOSES APPLICATION AGAINST MUKOKA
loses application against Mukoka
By Margaret Malenga
THE Lusaka High Court has refused to order US-based Zambian sports journalist Augustine Mukoka to pay security for costs to the Football Association of Zambia (FAZ).
The court has also refused to stay proceedings in a matter where Mukoka sued FAZ.
Mukoka in March this year sued FAZ for libel and defamation.
According to a statement of claim filed in the Lusaka High Court dated March 27, 2023, Mukoka contended that the Association had accused him of obtaining documents illegally and later banned him when he was not their member.
He said on or around April 11, 2018, the FAZ ethics committee summoned him to appear before it, and that he only came to learn about it through the media.
Mukoka explained that later he received the summon from the FAZ ethics committee.
He said the grounds upon which he was summoned related to articles published by unknown persons regarding financial statements which revealed huge pay-out amounts to the FAZ executive committee amounting to K1.4 million.
Mukoka said the money was alleged to have been sitting allowances paid for organising the 2017 Under-20 Africa Cup of Nations which Zambia hosted, and the Regional Under-17 COSAFA tournament the same year.
He explained that as a journalist he wrote various articles opposing the wasteful use of resources by FAZ.
Mukoka contended that most importantly he opposed FAZ’s action to give its officials huge sums of money at the expense of artistes, host mascot, entertainers, and car hire services, among others, who had not been paid at the time he wrote the articles.
He said upon learning of his summon, he wrote back to the FAZ ethics committee even though he was not a member of the Association.
Mukoka explained that on or around May 10, 2019, he learnt through a FAZ press statement that he and two others had been banned for three months for allegedly circulating FAZ documents illegally which were also obtained in contravention of the FIFA Code of Ethics.
He said the same statement indicated that he and two others would be summoned again by the FAZ ethics committee, but that by that time they had not been summoned.
Mukoka said if indeed some documents were obtained illegally, FAZ could have immediately reported the matter to the police.
He argued that his ban was malicious and that the committee that was set up to probe him was illegal.
Mukoka said FAZ had no legal justification for alleging that he illegally obtained the alleged documents nor did it have the legal basis to impose the alleged provisional 90-day ban on him.
He therefore demanded damages for libel and defamation.
Mukoka also demanded a mandatory order that FAZ rendered an apology for allegations it leveled against him and grounds upon which he was banned.
He further demanded that the apology be published through media of wide circulation and the FAZ online platform.
Mukoka also demanded aggravated damages, interest; any relief the court may deem fit, and costs.
And in opposition to Mukoka’s law suit, FAZ filed an application on June 2, 2023, asking the court to stay the proceedings pending his payment for security costs.
In the affidavit, FAZ general secretary Reuben Kamanga argued that the court had jurisdiction to grant an order for payment of security for costs on the ground that Mukoka was domiciled outside the court’s jurisdiction.
Kamanga said if an order for security was not granted by the court, FAZ’s rights might be a mere academic exercise, hence the association might not enjoy the benefits of the judgment if granted in its favour as execution outside the country might prove impracticable.
But Mukoka filed a counter argument, saying the power to grant an order for the payment of security of costs is discretionary, and that it is done with circumspect and judiciously.
He said an applicant in such a matter must demonstrate grounds that are sufficient in order for it to be granted.
Mukoka further argued that while it is true that he lives outside Zambia, he is a national who also has assets within the country.
He said he had no intention of moving or transferring his assets or businesses.
And passing the ruling, judge Sharon Newa said it was not mandatory for Mukoka to exhibit a bill of costs as there was sufficient proof that he is a Zambian with assets within the country.
‘’Therefore, in view of that, the requirement to exhibit a bill of costs to an application for payment of security for costs is not mandatory, but it assists the Court in arriving at a figure to be Ordered as security for costs. In this matter, Augustine Mukoka has demonstrated in the affidavit in opposition that while he is resident in the United States of America, he has businesses in Zambia, and he has a tenancy agreement in Zambia,’’ ruled judge Newa. ‘’Therefore he has assets that may be used to offset any Order for costs that may be made against him.
As Augustine Mukoka has demonstrated that while he is resident in the United States of America, he has assets within Zambia, this is not a proper case to Order payment of security for costs. The application is accordingly declined. The matter shall come up for hearing of the injunction application on 29th August, 2023 at 11:00 hours. Costs shall be in the cause, and leave to appeal is granted.’’
The Mast