By 
With a noticeably fuller afro and a complexion weathered by prison days, former Lumezi Member of Parliament Munir Zulu walked out of the Lusaka High Court in silence, his hopes for freedom dashed — at least for now.
As he was led away to continue serving his 12-month sentence for criminal libel, Zulu turned briefly toward journalists and flashed a peace sign — a gesture that signaled defiance, or perhaps hope that his political fight was far from over.
Zulu’s legal battle hit a dead end after the High Court dismissed his appeal for lack of merit.
He had asked the court to overturn his April 30, 2025, conviction, arguing that the remarks for which he was jailed were made on parliamentary grounds and should have been protected by privilege.
Read more: Witness admits to being UPND cadre in sedition case against lawmaker Munir
But the court disagreed, ruling that his conduct did not fall within the protection of parliamentary immunity.
Zulu was convicted for defaming Finance Minister Situmbeko Musokotwane, Infrastructure Minister Charles Milupi, and then-Road Development Agency (RDA) board chairperson, Mulchand Kuntawala.
In a fiery press briefing held at the National Assembly’s media centre, Zulu accused the three of corruption, alleging that they were under investigation by the Anti-Corruption Commission over suspicious bank transactions.
He claimed that the two cabinet ministers corruptly received US$250,000 via a bank transfer from an unknown company. Zulu also alleged that Kuntawala had transferred US$150,000 to Milupi just two days before his appointment as RDA board chairperson.
In his appeal, Zulu maintained that his statements were made within the precincts of Parliament and should, therefore, be shielded by the Parliamentary Privileges Act.
However, High Court Judge Bonaventure Mbewe rejected the argument, clarifying that parliamentary privilege only covers statements made before the House or its committees — not remarks made at press briefings held during breaks.
“Privilege is not a licence to defame others outside the formal business of the House,” said Judge Mbewe.
“The press conference was clearly intended for public consumption and cannot be construed as part of parliamentary proceedings,” he added.
The judge also dismissed Zulu’s complaint that two of the three complainants — Musokotwane and Milupi — did not testify.
“There is no rule that requires complainants to appear in person,” Mbewe ruled, noting that Kuntawala had testified and provided evidence of reputational harm.
Justice Mbewe concluded that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and found no justification to overturn the magistrate’s decision.
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