TELL YOUR BOSS THAT HIS TIME TO ACCOUNT WILL COME…Sishuwa Sishuwa tells off one of HH’s presidential aides on X.
Dr Sishuwa writes:
Hello Chris Haambote!
I accept your lack of courage to use your real identity on X and your official designation as one of President Hichilema’s miscellaneous aides at State House, majority of whom are Tongas like you. What I do not accept is your continued display of incapacity to think more, which consequently places a burden on me to educate you even on basic stuff. The truth is that your boss messed up a good case and If Dalitso appeals against that ruling, he may easily get a stay of execution pending determination of the actual appeal, given Court of Appeal Justice Kelvin Muzenga’s ruling in the case of Pittscon Zambia Limited and 7 Others v the Anti Corruption Commission last June.
Dalitso gave an explanation for the source of his wealth: that it was a gift from his father. Legally speaking, all that he needed to provide is a ‘reasonable’ answer, not the truth. Why did you and your boss and your UPND friends at the ACC fail to summon Edgar Lungu to testify? Is it because you knew that you would lose the case because all that Lungu needed to say was that whatever he gave Dalitso were gifts received from his own friends? And since there is a fundamental lapse in the ACC Act in relation to gifts received by the president, your case would have instantly collapsed.
I fully understand the political motives behind the pursuit of Dalitso and other members of the Lungu family, but do not pretend even for a minute that you and your boss are outraged by corruption. If your boss was serious about fighting corruption, he would have addressed the loopholes in the law that enabled Lungu to give such gifts to his family without consequence. If your boss was serious about fighting corruption, he would have dismantled rather than inheriting or perfecting the networks of corruption left behind by Lungu and the PF. If your boss was serious about fighting corruption, he would have…
Your boss does not really care about fighting corruption, perhaps because he himself is a possible crook, unless those on the receiving end are political opponents or members of other ethnic-language groups. For instance, Hibeene Mwiinga – who served as Lungu’s economic adviser – his wife and sons were, like Dalitso, dragged to court on charges of being in possession of unexplained wealth worth K41 million. When the court dubiously acquitted them on all 21 counts, there was not a single protest from you and your boss. Unless I missed it, you have not even appealed against that ruling. Today, you want to come here and pretend that you and your boss are outraged by Dalitso’s many cars? Please cut me some slack.
Tell your boss that we know what is going on and time to account, time for reckoning, will come. The problem with politicians like your boss is that they do not learn from history. They usually think they are smarter than those who came before them – be it in relation to putting in place a plan to rig the elections or covering their tracks of corruption –until they are not. Let time; things change. Many things make themselves clear in the fullness of time.
Source: https://x.com/ssishuwa/status/2021369824061030892?s=20
Continue to dream and indulge in cannabis. Concealing your ignorance behind education does not benefit you. You believe we are all your History students, Sishuwa. Allow HH to be, and there is nothing you can do to make him answer to individuals like you, nothing at all, Sishuwa.
Yes,Ka Sishuwa does not understand that in law,no two cases can ever be exactly the same.They can only be similar.Circumstances,conditions,attitudes etc can differentiate similar cases thereby,compelling different perspectives and interpretations.To liken Daliso’s proven fraudulent case to Hibenes’s circumstantial evidence is to begin a dalliance with fallacies in reasoning and logic.But then again Sishuwa is only a historian who is an expert in contextualising and categorising past events and not a lawyer trained to reason and argue
Then, he will only find intellectual refuge by being un ashamedly tribal.
What a shallow chap!
Sishuwa Sishuwa and his wishful thinking. The law and not HH found Dalitso wanting. He was given the chance to explain how he acquired the said properties and vehicles, he failed to explain. Did you want HH to explain for him? Mind you, law is not History, your whole argument about Dalitso’s case just shows your severe deficiency in the law. Cases differ and the Lawyers who handle the cases differ too. For example, you have talked of Hibeene Mwiinga, who was equally given the chance to explain how he acquired his properties just like Dalitso was asked to explain. Suppose him and his Lawyers managed to convincingly explain how he acquired the said properties, did you want the Courts to still convict him because he is Tonga? And could that be a free and fair trial? No. Hibeene gave his employment background including his attachment to UN if I am mistaken. In the same manner, Dalitso could not have lost his vehicles and properties if he had explained how he acquired them. As you have put it yourself; all what Dalitso needed to do was to give a reasonable answer and not necessarily the truth. That’s all what the law wanted from him. The law knows no tribe, it just knows the evidence. The Courts are transparent, try to ask for Judgments in both cases and you will see the difference. One explained while the other one failed. So failure to explain how the acquisition was done is what has caused the forfeiture and not the tribe and HH has nothing to do with case, it’s Judiciary’s baby.
Yes,tell it