Chilima set free
Relief was the prevalent emotion for Vice-President Saulos Chilima after the High Court of Malawi Financial Crimes Division yesterday discharged him from a corruption case that was hanging around his neck since 2022.
His lawyers said yesterday that they hope the State will not revive the matter in future.
High Court Judge Redson Kapindu issued the order yesterday in Lilongwe following a certificate of discontinuance Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Masauko Chamkakala made on May 3 2024.
The order dated May 6 2023 reads: “The accused person herein, Dr Saulos Klaus Chilima, is immediately discharged in respect of the charges against him as specified in the aforementioned certificate of discontinuance.
“Consequently, all his conditions for his release on bail are hereby immediately removed.”
The decision has come after almost 18 months of court battles and Chillima was also expected to take plea last Friday.
Reacting to the development in an interview yesterday, one of Chilima’s lawyers Khumbo Soko said they were “thrilled” with the decision and that it was a relief for their client.
He said: “First of all, let me confirm that we have been served with the order of discharge upon the discontinuance. The effect of that will be that our client is now a free man, and as you can imagine, we are very thrilled for him.
“This has come as a huge relief because criminal trials are a source of distraction. This is it, we don’t expect that the decision has been made lightly. We would want to believe that the decision was carefully considered and we don’t anticipate that these charges will be coming back.”
National Advocacy Platform (NAP) chairperson Benedicto Kondowe said they saw the decision coming and warned against politicisation of corruption cases.
He said: “We saw this coming, looking at how it has dragged and the twists and turns in court on admissibility of evidence. What is concerning is that we have had so many cases discontinued without the public being appraised on reasons.
“This renders the fight against corruption an academic enterprise. The DPP’s powers need proper scrutiny to avoid abuse.
“The decision is also a wake-up call on how best we can depoliticise corruption cases. If we continue on this trajectory, we stand to lose billions of money from people who may sue the State. So, we need sanity, objectivity and professionalism in dealing with corruption cases.”
On his part, Centre for Social Accountability and Transparency executive director Willy Kambwandira said the matter was regrettable and a missed opportunity in the fight against corruption.
He said: “It clearly tells us that we have a crop of people who are immune. The State needs to tell us the grounds for corruption, otherwise my feeling is that the DPP is abusing his constitutional power, he has to be checked.”
Last month, Legal Affairs Committee of Parliament chairperson Peter Dimba said the DPP was due to appear before the committee when it commences its meetings from May 20 to provide reasons for discontinuance of several high-profile cases.
Under the country’s laws, the DPP has powers to discontinue a case, but is required, as provided in Section 99 (3) of the Constitution, to explain the justification to the Legal Affairs Committee within 10 days after the order.
During hearing of Chilima’s case, there was a heated argument over the defence’s demand for more disclosures from the State.
The defence legal team sought disclosures on minutes of the Defence Council meeting held on October 16 2020 authorising the procurement of armoured personnel carriers (APCs) and a memorandum of March 2021 from the Malawi Defence Force (MDF) to President Lazarus Chakwera seeking authorisation to buy APCs from Malachite FZE, a company linked to United Kingdom-based Malawian businessperson Zuneth Sattar, using single sourcing.
Chilima was arrested in November 2022 after being named among 84 individuals suspected to have received bribes from Sattar, according to a report the ACB submitted to President Chakwera in June 2022. He was accused of having received unspecified sum of money from Sattar to allegedly influence public contracts in his favour.
In April this year, the High Court dismissed as premature the defence’s application for disclosures of ‘sensitive documents’ in a case, but Kapindu said if such information will be relevant in the case, in the interest of fair trial a decision will be made on whether to tender the ‘sensitive’ information or terminate the case altogether.
