By 
Former Ministry of Health Chief Procurement Officer, Wilson Lungu, has opposed the State’s application to appeal his acquittal in the Honeybee drug supply scandal, arguing the move was both legally misplaced and filed well beyond the prescribed time limit.
Lungu, who was jointly charged with former Health Minister Dr. Chitalu Chilufya, ex-Permanent Secretary Mulalelo Kakulubelwa, and several others, contended that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) , Gilbert Phiri,had no jurisdiction to revive the matter more than four years after the acquittal. Others in the case included Emmanuel Mubanga, Bonaventure Chilinde, and three directors of Honeybee Pharmacy: Imran Lunat, Zakir Hussain Motala, and Abdurrahim Motala.
The group had been accused of conspiring to defraud the government of over US$17 million related to the procurement of 22,500 health kits from Honeybee Pharmacy.
The charges ranged from failure to follow procurement procedures, forgery, importation of substandard drugs, and issuing unlawful pharmaceutical licences.
The initial case collapsed in January 2021 when the Lusaka Magistrates’ Court acquitted all nine accused persons after the complainant,Lusaka lawyer Joseph Chirwa withdrew the complaint.
However, in 2022, the State reopened the case and slapped Lungu and five others with a charge of willfully failing to comply with procurement guidelines in relation to tender No. MOH/SP/032/19. Lungu objected to the charge, arguing that he had already been acquitted on similar grounds.
He presented a formal notification of his earlier acquittal.
The DPP challenged that objection, questioning the validity of the acquittal on grounds that Lungu had not taken plea before being discharged. While the High Court initially ruled in favour of the DPP and annulled the acquittal, Lungu successfully appealed that ruling in the Court of Appeal in November 2022.
Despite that, the DPP has now returned to the Economic and Financial Crimes Court, seeking leave to appeal the 2021 acquittal out of time.
In response, Lungu submitted that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the request, pointing out that under Section 321A of the Criminal Procedure Code, the DPP had only 14 days to appeal against such decisions ,a a window that closed over four years ago.
He also warned that granting the application would severelyrrl prejudice the accused, as crucial witnesses may no longer be traceable and records may have deteriorated or been lost over time.
“Thus, having failed to secure the reversal and or annulment of the acquittal through a review,this appeal represent a second attempt by the applicant to have the acquittal disturbed,” he stated.
He described the attempt to reopen the case as an “illegal invitation” for the court to act outside its jurisdiction.
Lungu urged the court to dismiss the State’s application, branding it “hopelessly out of time and improperly before the court.”
WARNING! All rights reserved. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.
Comments