UNMASKING THE TRUTH- THE KELVIN SAMPA TRIAL AND THE QUESTIONS IT RAISES
The ongoing trial of former Kasama Member of Parliament, Kelvin Sampa, continues to expose critical flaws in the prosecution’s case, casting doubt on the credibility of the allegations against him.
At the core of the matter is a business transaction involving Sampa and two Japanese nationals, Mr. Sakamoto and Mr. Kunihiro, who sought to invest in purified gold. Sampa contributed $220,000 to the venture, and the group was working toward purchasing 5 kilograms of purified gold valued at $300,000. Kunihiro contributed $80,000 as part of the investment. However, an additional $70,000 was secretly added by Kunihiro, but it was deliberately kept hidden from his partner, Sakamoto, who was unaware of the extra amount. This hidden contribution only came to light during the investigation.
This raises serious questions: Why did Kunihiro hide his $70,000 contribution from Sakamoto? and why was it not disclosed at the time of the transaction?
The Question of Undeclared Foreign Currency
There is a serious issue regarding the money that entered Zambia. Zambian law requires foreigners to declare any amounts over $5,000 when entering the country, yet no records show that Sakamoto and Kunihiro declared the money they brought into Zambia. The Zambian authorities have failed to show any proof of the source of the foreign money that entered Zambia, raising the question: How did such large sums of undeclared foreign cash enter the country, and why is there no investigation into this illegal entry?
If this money was brought into Zambia illegally, why is the case not under the jurisdiction of the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC), which handles such matters? Why is Kelvin Sampa, a Zambian businessman, being targeted for his involvement in a legitimate investment deal while such critical questions remain unanswered?
Sampa’s Response to Suspected Counterfeit
Sampa took action when he suspected that the money in a safe, which had been in the custody of the Japanese nationals for over two weeks, might be counterfeit. Following guidance from the Bank of Zambia, he voluntarily approached law enforcement on October 3, 2024, to report the matter. However, instead of being treated as a law-abiding citizen who sought to uphold financial integrity, he became the target of an investigation.
Concerns Over Due Process: Detention Without Charge
Sampa’s detention raised further concerns when Detective Inspector Peter Phiri, under cross examination, admitted that Sampa had been detained for over seven days without formal charges or police bond. This violation of due process prompted a High Court intervention via a Habeas Corpus application to secure Sampa’s release. This judicial intervention underscores the serious flaws in the investigative process and highlights the need for transparency and fairness in legal proceedings.
..
Evidence Gaps and Investigative Oversights
The prosecution has failed to present conclusive evidence that Sampa received the funds in question. A supposed video of him acknowledging the $70,000 has not been produced in court and a safe seized as evidence has a mismatched serial number. These discrepancies, combined with other procedural missteps, significantly weaken the prosecution’s case and raise doubts about the integrity of the investigation.
A Matter of Legal Integrity and Transparency
As these revelations unfold, it becomes clear that Sampa’s financial involvement in the deal was part of a legitimate business venture, not a fraudulent scheme. The trial is exposing serious investigative oversights, selective prosecution and procedural failures that have significantly undermined the case against him..
A Case Under Increasing Scrutiny
With every new development, the case against Kelvin Sampa is growing more complex. Questions about due process, regulatory oversight and investigative integrity are becoming central to the public’s concerns. This trial is not only a matter of personal legal fate for Sampa but also about the broader issues of justice, fairness, and the rule of law in Zambia.
A Matter of Justice and Transparency
As the trial continues, the central question remains: To what extent should a businessman be held accountable for an investment deal that did not materialize, especially when key evidence suggests internal mismanagement between foreign partners? The outcome of this trial will have broader implications for investor protection, the integrity of Zambia’s legal system and the protection of constitutional rights.
The trial continues…