I AM not a crook, I don’t steal but it is coming out of political malice, says Hakainde Hichilema.
“It was not the intention of picking out Madam Nawakwi. Edith is venomous, the way she speaks, the arrogance she exhibits, not with me only but to everybody who she thinks is standing in her way. Why would she think I am standing in her way? It was not an issue – it was an issue of mentioning cabinet. Was she not a member of cabinet during the material time? Mr [Alexander] Chikwanda during the material time was a chief of staff at State House. Madam Nawakwi is malicious by and large but we accept her, that’s her character, God made her like that but I have a different character although made by God, we co-exist,” he said.
Hichilema accused Nawakwi of being a PF surrogate.
He said he had no issue with calls for a probe being championed by the PF over the privatization programme.
“The probe can be done, I have no issue if it is of value to the country,” he said. “We don’t have to be surrogates of the ruling party, as an opposition we have to be representing the masses that are not getting a service from government such as jobs. The youths from college, university, are roaming the streets without jobs. What Nawakwi and the PF are trying to do is divert our attention to such issues and drive us to issues, to things of a house in Serval Road…is that what is important? We have misplaced priority; we must not leave the topic of fire tenders, corruption. What she is doing clearly demonstrates that she is a surrogate of PF, her actions are very clear. Parroting things that are not true, a national leader must add quality, must bring a competitive atmosphere into the political arena so that government money is not stolen by those in government, so as the fire tenders. She should be talking about fire tenders with some of us in opposition. Why is she not talking about that? She is roosting for PF, she is a surrogate of PF. She is an individual who habours venom and foul mouth.”
He said her favour for Bill 10 shows that she is a surrogate because a genuine opposition just like the church does not favour the bill.
In an interview on Hot FM yesterday, Hichilema said contrary to assertions by FDD leader Edith Nawakwi that he abused his role in the privatisation process to offer himself a house belonging Lima Bank, he said he bought the said property from the National Tobacco Company.
He said the said property on Serval Road in Lusaka was not property of Lima Bank when he bought it at K61 million.
“I participated in the privatisation process, [but] I was not in charge of the privatisation programme. It was the government of the day, the MMD government. They were responsible for the privatisation programme. In terms of policy they were responsible to set the privatisation policy, it was not myself because I was not part of government,” he explained. “Legally they were responsible because they set up the privatisation Act of 1992 as the government of the MMD under the late president [Frederick] Chiluba. So they were responsible and the overall structure…I think today for us to explain these things so that all those who may be unaware can understand, those who may be mischievous, their mischief can be laid bare today.”
He said the MMD after taking office in 1991 proceeded to enact a privatisation Act in 1992 which meant that parliament made a decision to give the citizens the law of the privatisation Act.
“The structure, the way they worked was that after the law was made, there was cabinet on top chaired by the president of that time Mr Chiluba. Under the cabinet there was a committee of ministers within cabinet called committee of ministers on privitisation. HH was not there. Then there was the [Zambia] Privatization Agency, ZPA, as an institution, as a manager to implement the privatisation programme and that’s where the policy and legal power lay,” Hichilema explained.
He said the decider was cabinet chaired by the president with sub-committees such as ministries of finance, commerce and industry, mines, depending on the assets which were key.
“The manager was the Privatization Agency, which then would ask for expert advice from many people, thousands of Zambians – not just Zambians, lawyers, corporate finance guys like ourselves, real estate agents, valuators, property valuators, engineering firms, all of them from 1991, 1992 along were somehow involved, many of them and 270 companies were sold on units as it were,” Hichilema said. “Today, HH was responsible when HH was below the ZPA, asked to do his professional work like an asset verification. Yes, in terms of involvement at that level and not in terms of responsibility, in terms of legal power, in terms of policy power…I was not responsible, I was not in charge.”
Hichilema said he bought the house in Kabulonga but not from Lima Bank as alleged by Nawakwi and he displayed documents in arguing his point.
He added that Nawakwi’s claims are ambiguous and out of political malice to discredit him because he was running for political office.
“I never bought a house from Lima bank. I never stole a house. I don’t steal and here are the facts about the property. This property is called Farm 488A/40/A/3 Serval Road, that’s the name of the property, that’s the identity, that’s the legal identity of the property. I bought this house from a company called TBZ, so this house basically was advertised, open tender, public open tender through the Newspaper in 1995. Madam Nawakwi says I stole the house from Lima Bank because in her allegation I was involved in the privatisation of Lima bank in 1998. But I bought this house though a public tender in 1995,” he explained. “The timeline there does not match, someone is lying…is it me or it is her? It is her who is lying. I say Edith Nawakwi you lied, I never bought a house from Lima bank in 1998 or thereafter but 1995.”
The UPND leader said he responded to a newspaper advert in May 1995 and after his response he was awarded as he was the highest bidder at K61 million.
He said as a business person he was already at the time able to tender for the house at K61 million.
Hichilema said he did not make money from the privatisation programme but that he was already in the position spend such an amount “as God was kind enough” through his businesses at only 26 years old.
“The firm in Ndola called TP Chibwe advertised the house (displaying the copies) who were valuation surveyors and state agents who had been engaged to sell the property. For the avoidance of doubt, I myself just made an offer, the advert had many other houses and I singled out this one and to be specific my offer went in on 26th of April 1995 and I was offered the house. Who owned the house,” Hichilema asked as he displayed evidence from Ministry of Lands.
He said a Chileshe was the owner of the house and later sold it to the Tobacco Board of Zambia in July 1987.
Hichilema showed that after TBZ borrowed money from Finance Bank and could not pay it back, the house was repossessed and passed on to TP Chibwe to advertise for sale.
He said the money he used to buy the house was not from privatisation as alleged but from his other business ventures as a partner, shareholder of a couple of businesses.
Hichilema went on to explain that he paid for the house through his lawyer Michael Musonda, the current deputy Chief Justice – who paid off the mortgage.
“The mortgage plus interest was at K10 million as at 27th September 1990 and the money I paid them they went and cleared the mortgage… Then they were able now on 7 July 1995, they discharged the mortgage, that’s the money and then the house was offered to me by National Tobacco Company through the real estate agent. I bought it, registered it on 7 July 1995 and became the owner of the house 14/3A, in short we call it Serval Road Kabulonga,” he said. “It was never a Lima Bank house. Lima Bank came up for privatisation in 1998, I bought the house in 1995. Edith Nawakwi, you are a liar.”
And Hichilema clarified that he did not have the power to sell mines.
He said he was a service provider contracted in the privatisation and was paid for it as that was his job.
Hichilema said he never privatised RAMCOZ or any other mine in the country.
He recalled that RAMCOZ was privatised in 1997 and he was not involved, stressing that those who care to know the truth would find records at the Zambia Development Agency.
Asked why Nawakwi mentioned his name, Hichilema said, “Malice, she is confusing things. She is claiming that I was the receiver; it is wrong and highly malicious. Neither did I privatise RAMCOZ nor was I the receiver. I was none. I am not a thief. I have never stolen anything.”
Hichilema said Nawakwi has been misleading not only herself but the public as well.
He said he is shocked that a former minister of finance could fail to understand basic facts adding that such pointed to only one thing, which is malice.
“Political malice to get HH at all costs even if he is not a criminal,” he said.
Meanwhile, Hichilema said if there is an asset that delivered more than expectation in the privatisation process was the Livingstone project, the Mosi-O-Tunya InterContinental Hotel.
He said the project was a world class asset, competitive internationally and was delivered meticulously to the standards that were set in the privatisation programme.
Hichilema recalled that the policy of privatisation set an agenda, objectives and what needed to be achieved and the law allowed it to happen.
“If I was not Hakainde Hichilema and I was not seeking public office, if I was not born in particular area I would be praised everyday about the way that transaction was handled. Completely first class in accordance to the set objectives of the privatisation agenda, the broader programme. There is an allegation that I was a shareholder when the bids came through…” he noted.
He said the bids for the hotel were received through ZPA and then the organisation decided whom they thought would help them to structure the transaction in accordance to the set objectives and that was time they engaged people like him.
Hichilema said he was not alone in the process.
He clarified that he was not a shareholder of Sun International for him to declare conflict of interest when he was asked to assist the MMD government through the cabinet and ZPA.
“I was never shareholder in Sun International. I invite any citizen to go to the Registrar of Companies then, go to PACRA now, and see if HH was a shareholder because that what Nawakwi, Madam Nawakwi alleged that I was shareholder and therefore gave myself Sun International, she is wrong. I was never a shareholder,” Hichilema said.
He said there was no asset that he bought from ZPA stating that what he has, like the one on Serval road, were acquired from owners who were not part of government or ZPA.
He said some people alleging that he bought assets through privatisation were in fact the ones that did directly from government.
Hichilema challenged those with evidence that he bought assets from the privatisation process to bring evidence.
He said in Zambia there was a perception that those who make the loudest noise are clever and, or right but that in most cases they’re never the most intelligent.
“We have made mistakes in our country to reward noise makers, we must reward facts, intelligence, substance and hard work. I have never wanted to reach this level, I just wanted to explain but this matter keeps coming up,” Hichilema said. “We have addressed your concerns of how we became owners of what we have. Now, let’s ask someone to explain something about… 48 houses, $42 million worth of fire tenders, mukula cartel, allegations from Rwanda, billions stolen as reported in successive FIC reports….”