JOHN SANGWA: We defended Chiluba as a matter of principle

JOHN SANGWA: We defended Chiluba as a matter of principle

An excerpt from Conversations with Memorable Personalities (2022) by Amos Malupenga, Pages 460-461.
***
Amos Malupenga: Now, let’s talk about the case that has put you and Mr. Simeza in the limelight or the spotlight. This is your defence of former president Dr. Chiluba at a time when everyone thought Dr. Chiluba was an outcast, a thief and a plunderer. People thought Dr. Chiluba didn’t deserve to be represented by lawyers like yourselves who have stood for good governance and human rights but you surprised everyone when you decided to take up that case. How did
you arrive at that decision?

John Sangwa: Personally, I don’t spend sleepless nights over that. For me to decide to represent Dr. Chiluba is something we have done in the past, it was not something unique. The decision that we made was founded on one basic principle: the principle of the rule of law.

Dr. Chiluba, like any other person, has a right to legal representation and the law says anyone accused of a crime is assumed innocent until proved guilty. Our involvement was basically to send that clear message that Dr. Chiluba is just like anyone of us no matter how bad the kind of thoughts people may have about him. The point is he is just like you and I.
He is innocent until proved guilty.

The thing to remember is, and I have always argued, that as a country we can destroy everything that we want but we should never destroy our judicial institutions and our laws. The laws represent standards by which as a people we have declared that this is how we shall conduct and govern ourselves. Once we begin to ignore the basic laws, basic legal principles,
then we perish as a country. And our involvement in the Chiluba case, even against public opinion, was to send that message very clearly.

Amos Malupenga: You didn’t think that you were risking your lives by so doing?

John Sangwa: Well, that crossed my mind at some point, but personally I look at being a lawyer as a calling and I think God has equipped me to deal with that particular calling. Well, family members came and said this was risky, leave it alone but I told myself, ‘God has called me to do this job.’ God cannot call you to do a job and not protect you in the process and I knew that as
long as I did the job, God would protect me. I had nothing to fear if that was the way my life was to end.

Never once did I think of abandoning the case. Our main consideration was purely the merit of the case. We can talk about the immunity case, I have my own thoughts about the way the Supreme Court ruled. But the point is we were just giving life to the basic principles of law that this country has subscribed to.
***