RESPONSES TO THE PRESS QUERIES ON ALLEGATIONS OF NEPOTISM, FAVORITISM
AND INSTITUTIONAL SABOTAGE.
Responses to your press queries dated 14th August, 2025 from News Diggers and 19th August,2025 from Muvi TV, regarding allegations of Nepotism, Favouritism, and Institutional Sabotage.
For the sake of consistency and clarity, management has decided to provide
one consolidated response to both media houses.
In responding, we wish to reiterate that the Office of the Public Protector
remains guided by its constitutional and statutory mandate, and by the
principles of integrity, impartiality, and accountability. Our responses will
therefore address each of the issues raised, in the order they were presented
1. Favoritism- That certain Members of staff have been placed on “holding’’
for extended periods undermining the institution’s ability to carry out its
mandate.
ANSWER: The Office would have appreciated you providing the details of the affected Officers to enable it provide an appropriate response.
2. Nepotism – That individuals related to you have been appointed to key and
junior positions.
ANSWER: The allegation of nepotism is not just untrue but also unfounded and
malicious. Note that the Office of the Public Protector does not appoint its staff.
All members of staff are appointed by the Civil Service Commission through Public Service Management Division.
The Office of the Public Protector does not have authority to employ, promote, transfer or dismiss its members of staff.
The said powers are vested in the Civil Service Commission and the Public Service Management Division.
Therefore, all members of staff of the Office of the Public are employees of the Civil Service Commission. You may wish to refer your query to the appointing authority.
3. Sexual Harassment Cases – That Chief Administrator Mr. Kebby Hakalima and Senior Human Resource Officer Mr. Malama Chishala were suspended in February 2025 following sexual harassment complaints supported by evidence, but no disciplinary action was taken.
ANSWER: To start with, I wish to state that the Office of the Public Protector has a zero-tolerance policy to Sexual Harassment matters. When these allegations came up, the Office called for a meeting with all members of staff requesting them to submit complaints.
However, the complaints that were received were anonymous which made it difficult to institute disciplinary action as no one
came forward to formally complain or willing to give evidence to that effect.
The Office took the following immediate measures:
1. Realising the sensitive nature of the allegations, the knowledge gap that
officers may have, and the difficulties that one may have to open up to
fellow members of staff of issues of victimization, the Office engaged the
Gender Division at Cabinet Office.
A Gender expert came and had
engagements with all Officers at the Office of the Public Protector.
The meeting was attended by all members of staff and senior Management.
The said Expert made an invitation to any one who may be a victim of any
form of gender or sexual harassment to engage her in Confidence.
The Office never received any further feedback from the Expert.
2. The Office developed and drafted standard operating procedures for the
OPP
3. The Office developed and drafted the Code of Conduct for the OPP.
4. The Office has continued to engage female members of staff to come
forward with evidence against the mentioned individuals.
Lastly, I wish to state that there are various reasons that affect the performance of any government institution.
The above allegations have no bearing on the performance of this institution.
The Office of the Public protector, like any other government institution, grapples with insufficient funding, staffing levels, infrastructure and many other related issues that affect the performance of the institution.
You may wish to look at the Parliamentary report of the
committee on cabinet affairs on the review of the management and
operations of the office of the public protector presented to parliament, that
highlighted some of the challenges faced by the office of the public protector in relation to its performance.
Mrs. Caroline C.Z. Sokoni
PUBLIC PROTECTOR – ZAMBIA