By 
Presidential aspirant, Given Katuta, says she is still coming to terms with her acquittal in a case she believed was politically motivated, admitting she had mentally prepared herself for imprisonment, as such cases rarely end in favour of the accused.
Katuta, the Chiengi Member of Parliament, was on Monday acquitted of threatening violence against Times of Zambia photojournalist, Henry Chunza, after the court found that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond the required legal standard.
She had been charged following an altercation at the National Assembly last year, during which she was alleged to have threatened violence, spat on Chunza and hurled insults at him after being ejected from the House for gross misconduct.
The incident occurred in a highly charged political environment, a context Katuta later said had shaped her expectation of a custodial sentence.
Outside court, an emotional Katuta broke down in tears as she embraced and kissed her husband, Lawrence Mwelwa, moments after being set at liberty.
She said she held no grudge against the complainant, whom she described as her “young brother,” and thanked him, adding that she was shocked to have survived what she believed was a politically driven prosecution.
“Look at how I am dressed, because I had prepared to go to jail. It’s rare that one survives a politically motivated case. This case couldn’t have come, but as we tried to reach out to him so we could talk,” she said.
Katuta said with the matter now behind her, she would focus on her political journey ahead of the 2026 general elections.
Delivering judgment, Principal Resident Magistrate Idah Phiri held that the evidence before the court did not meet the threshold for criminal intimidation.
She noted that none of the witnesses, including PW3, testified that Katuta had threatened to beat, injure or assault the complainant, or to damage any of his property. PW3, in particular, clarified that he did not hear the accused issue any threat of violence.
The magistrate observed that while Chunza testified that he felt threatened, subjective fear alone could not convert non-threatening words or conduct into a criminal offence.
She stressed that the test was objective, requiring the court to assess both the accused’s words and intent, rather than the emotional reaction of the complainant.
Viewed within the context of parliamentary proceedings, with security officers and Members of Parliament present, the court found that the words and actions attributed to Katuta could not reasonably be interpreted as a declaration of impending injury.
The magistrate said the facts disclosed a heated confrontation and an objection to being photographed, but not a communicated intention to inflict harm as leverage or retribution.
Magistrate Phiri cautioned that extending the definition of threats to cover such conduct would blur the distinction between criminal intimidation and ordinary mistreatment, thereby criminalising behaviour Parliament did not intend to punish.
She further castigated the police and the prosecution for proceeding with the case in the absence of cogent and credible evidence, warning that such decisions undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system and impose unnecessary financial and institutional burdens on the State.
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