Zamtel denies engaging in gentleman’s agreements
By Mwaka Ndawa
ZAMBIA Telecommunications Company (ZAMTEL) says it does not engage in gentleman’s agreements as portrayed by former Kabushi PF member of parliament Bowman Lusambo.
Zamtel states that Lusambo did not follow its proper procedure for leasing property, but instead used his position as then provincial minister, to bulldoze his way into taking possession of the house, without signing the lease agreement, and such attitude continued throughout the tenure of the tenancy.
Zamtel argued that Lusambo is not entitled to the K2,050,327.80 which he is claiming as cost of repairs for the house which was rented out to him.
This is in a matter where Zamtel has sued Lusambo in the Lusaka High Court for non-payment of rentals amounting to K590,000.
The company charged that Lusambo has been a problematic tenant as he has neglected to pay rentals after it refused to pay him K2 million for the cost of repairs which he made to the house without its approval.
In his affidavit in opposition to originating summons, Lusambo claimed that he had a verbal agreement with former Zamtel chief executive officer Dr Mupanga Mwanakatwe to use his own money and refurbish the dilapidated house which was rented to him by the telecommunications company, on a condition that the money would be deductible from the monthly rentals.
Lusambo is reclaiming K2,050,327.80 from Zamtel which he spent on renovating the house.
But in affidavit in reply, Henry Lungu, a human resource operations manager at Zamtel clarified that the lease agreement was dated April 24, 2017, with effect from December 1, 2016 as provided in clause 1 of the lease agreement.
He said the disparity in the dates was as a result of Lusambo’s hesitation to sign the lease agreement despite several reminders requesting that he appends his signature and returns the copies to Zamtel.
“The lease agreement had been with the respondent long before signing it and acknowledging the commencement date,” Lungu said. “Where the lease agreement is specific as to the effective date, the date of when the lease agreement was signed is not the effective date of the agreement.”
Lungu stated Lusambo’s intention to acquire its property through manipulation was made clear within months of his occupying the house when he demanded that it be sold to him, as clearly admitted in his affidavit in opposition stating that he took possession of the premises in August 2016 long before his application was granted.
He said Lusambo abused his authority when he opted to use official headed paper from the Office of the President in a private personal matter when communicating with Zamtel.
“The respondent is not entitled to any of the claims, as it is the respondent who owes the applicant unpaid rentals and costs for restoring the property to its original state,” said Lungu.