Chiluba found "Not Guilty" in All Counts.

M

MissKitim

Member
Apr 27, 2009
44
2
FYI

"Former Republican president Federick Chiluba has been acquitted by the Lusaka magistrates’ court over corruption charges he was facing involving the theft of US $500,000.

 The judgment delivered by Ndola High Court Registrar Johns Chinyama, sitting as a magistrate that took about six hours to deliver however found his co-accused Access Financial Services Limited former directors Aaron Chungu and Faustin Kabwe guilty.

 According to the judgment, the acquittal was based on the fact that the prosecution team failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt on all counts against the former president.

 "I find that the accused is not guilty on all counts," Chinyama said.

 “We are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused stole funds,” judge Jones Chinyama said as he read out the verdict in a six-hour hearing.

 “I find that the accused is not guilty on all counts,” Chinyama said.

 There was wild jubilation as sympathisers chanted pro-Chiluba songs as he left the court buildings. He immediately announced that he would be holding a press conference at his Kabulonga residence."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Na leo Zambia ilikuwa hukumu ya Rais wa Zamani wa Zambia FTJ Chiluba. Hukumu ilianzwa kusomwa toka asubuhi na imeisha muda sio mrefu.
Shutuma zote za ufisadi juu yake ameonekana hana hatia..na sasa yuko huru.


What more? This is Africa?
Kweli vita dhidi ya rushwa, ufisadi itakuja kushinda????
Inatupa picha gani Tanzania???


Kama mahakama ya kitaifa ilimfound quilty....then mahakama ya nchi yake not quilty..mhhhhhh!!!!
 
Ni kweli ni kupoteza tu hela...sasa kinachofuata atadai fidia na hela za walalahoi ndizo zitakazotumika kumlipa.....atamjulisha na zilizochotwa enzi zake...
Inasikitisha sana
 
lol,ila sheria ndio ilivyo bana.unaweza ukawa kweli ulikwiba lakini hakuna ushahidi wa kutosha kuonyesha kuwa uliiba.
 
Bata said:
lol,ila sheria ndio ilivyo bana.unaweza ukawa kweli ulikwiba lakini hakuna ushahidi wa kutosha kuonyesha kuwa uliiba.
Click to expand...

Kwa ujumla hakuna haki mahakamani, ni ujanja tu wa kupangilia mambo na mwisho wake inaonekana mhalifu hana kosa. Ndo haya tumeyaona hata kwenye hukumu ya kesi ya Zombe na wenzake leo. Ni MUNGU tu aliye hakimu wa haki.
 
Tatizo hizo pesa huwa hawatumii peke yao,vigogo wote huwa wanapata. ndio maana kesi itaendeshwa hata miaka 3 lakini hatimaye mtuhumiwa anaachiwa huru.
 
Hivi kwanini "lie detector machines" zisiwe legallised kutumika mahakamani??

Maana sasa hivi kinachoendelea mahakamani ni vioja vitupu.
Mara nyingi walio na makosa, hukumu huishia "not quilty" na asiye na makosa hukumiwa "quilty".
Ina maana watu wameshaujua mfumo mzima wa judiciary system na jinsi ya kumanouvre ili mtu aonekane hana hatia kesi inapofika mwisho..
 
MissKitim said:
Hivi kwanini "lie detector machines" zisiwe legallised kutumika mahakamani??

Maana sasa hivi kinachoendelea mahakamani ni vioja vitupu.
Mara nyingi walio na makosa, hukumu huishia "not quilty" na asiye na makosa hukumiwa "quilty".
Ina maana watu wameshaujua mfumo mzima wa judiciary system na jinsi ya kumanouvre ili mtu aonekane hana hatia kesi inapofika mwisho..
Click to expand...

Tatizo sio mashine bali binadamu wenyewe. Hata mashine ikisema uko
guilty na Jaji akuachie huru, itasiaida kivipi? Hii ndio Afrika tuijuayo siye.
The verdict was already predetermined kama ya Zombe vile....Jana kweli
ilikua siku mbovu kwa sheria/haki.
 
As Quoted

"As it became clear that he was going to be acquitted, Frederick Chiluba - a deeply religious man - looked up and whispered a prayer.
His many supporters crammed into the court whooped and clapped as the magistrate delivered six not guilty verdicts.
Elation turned into chaos as the diminutive former president, in his trademark high heels, left for home where he gave an impromptu news conference. The devil had been defeated, he declared, and he criticised foreign countries for meddling in Zambian affairs.
 Thanking God, his wife and well-wishers, he closed proceedings with a rousing hymn."


"Africa sina hamu". Rushwa imekuwa kama ukimwi miongoni mwetu..inaendelea kututafuna huku tunaona..na kugugumia kwa maumivu, kuitoa tunashindwa.

Sasa hapo mtu mzima anatumia mgongo wa dini kujisafisha na si ajabu wananchi wengi waTaaamini kuwa kweli alikuwa msafi. Maana chochote kinachokuja kwa jina la imani ya mtu, ni rahisi sana kukamata sympathisers...


"Nisichoelewa, mke wake miezi michache iliyopita alihukumiwa miaka 3 kwa matumizi mabaya ya pesa za serikali alizopokea kutoka kwa Mume wake. Leo hii mume anahukumiwa halafu eti anaonekana hana hatia???!!!!!....."
UK high court pia ilimwona ana hatia...nchi yake eti hana hatia...???!!!
 
Source: The Post Newspaper ( Zambia)
Editorial Column

There are many questions being asked about the acquittal of Frederick Chiluba by magistrate Jones Chinyama yesterday. People are asking what the Chiluba acquittal means. What does it mean? Put simply, it means Chiluba won't have to go to jail. But of course beyond this, there can be a number of interpretations. To Chiluba, this means he is not only a free man who doesn't have to go to jail; to him, it means he is a clean man who didn't steal anything from the Zambian people, and to borrow from Rupiah Banda's vocabulary, he is a damn honest man. But the issue doesn't end with Chiluba's interpretation no matter how much he will try to push this line.

These criminal proceedings that yesterday ended with Chiluba being acquitted and his co-accused being sentenced to three years imprisonment are just part of the story. There is still a London High Court judgment in the hands of Rupiah's government. And Rupiah's government has taken this judgment to the High Court of Zambia to be registered so that it can be enforced against Chiluba. This means that once this judgment is registered, Rupiah's government will move against Chiluba and recover back to the people what he had stolen from them. For some reasons, the registration of this judgment has dragged for a very long period through various court processes.

Rupiah's government's attempt to register the London High Court judgment against Chiluba raises a lot of questions. In one breadth, Rupiah is saying Chiluba is an innocent man, a damn good president who has not stolen anything from the Zambian people, a clean man and so on and so forth. In another, Rupiah's government is in the courts armed with the London judgment trying to recover from Chiluba what they believe he had stolen from the Zambian people. These are two diametrically opposite and irreconcilable positions. You can't be wrong and be right at the same time; you can't be a thief and be an innocent person, a clean man at the same time. You can only be one thing: either clean or not clean.

In the light of Rupiah's pronouncements, it will be very interesting to see how his Attorney General will proceed in the High Court trying to register and enforce the London High Court judgment against Chiluba. This matter is already in the High Court. Are they going to connive and stop the Attorney General from registering and enforcing that judgment? Is the High Court going to be assisted to refuse to register that judgment to suit Rupiah's position on Chiluba? If this happens, what will it mean?

There are many questions that are being asked about Chiluba's acquittal. Many people are asking: what is the difference between the London High Court judgment and yesterday's Lusaka Magistrate's Court acquittal of Chiluba? Put simply, this is a question about the difference between a civil judgment, that is the London High Court judgment obtained by the Zambian government against Chiluba and yesterday's criminal acquittal of Chiluba by the Lusaka Magistrate's Court. There are many examples where a person has been acquitted by a criminal court but found wanting on the same issue by a civil court. The classical example of this is that of former United States football hero Orenthal James Simpson, popularly known as O.J Simpson. O.J Simpson was found not guilty as judged by the criminal court in the murder of his wife and her friend. Yet a civil court held him accountable. So, how is the civil court's determination different from the criminal? And so is O.J still not guilty of murder?

Clearly, our people are not alone in being confused about how a person acquitted of murder in a criminal trial can be held liable for a victim's wrongful death in a civil trial.

The first step to understand this seeming contradiction is to know that a criminal prosecution involves different laws, a different court system, and different burdens of proof. And to convict in the criminal court, the case against the defendant must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

In a civil case for wrongful death, on the other hand, you have to show only that the defendant was legally responsible for the death. But, to get damages, as the plaintiffs did in the O.J case, you have to show that the defendant acted recklessly. The burden of proof in a civil case is preponderance of the evidence – a much lesser burden than is required in a criminal case.

So, while a criminal court might reasonably fail to find guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and acquit the accused, a civil court might also reasonably find by a preponderance of the evidence that he acted recklessly and should be held civilly accountable. Is O.J Simpson a murderer, a criminal? A civil court found it more likely than not that he caused the death of his wife and her friend. A criminal court was unable to find beyond a reasonable doubt that O.J committed murder. Seen this way, there is no contradiction.

This is the way to look at the acquittal of Chiluba in the Magistrate's Court yesterday and the finding of the High Court in London against Chiluba. Again, seen in this way, there is no contradiction between the London High Court judgment against Chiluba and his acquittal by the Magistrate's Court yesterday. From a legal point of view, the issue doesn't require any disquisition; it's a straightforward issue. But there are problems on the political front created by the political leadership of this country. ​

Throughout Chiluba's trial in the Magistrate's Court, Rupiah, as head of state, stood on the side of the accused and not on the side of the state. It is the state that took Chiluba to court both in London and in our own courts here. And the head of that state is Rupiah. Clearly, what this means is that at some point, the state seemed to have abandoned its own case against Chiluba and was just short of asking for the discontinuance of the case because it might have been politically sensitive to take that route. It will not be far-fetched for anyone to come to that conclusion given what the head of state, on whose behalf these matters were being prosecuted, had been saying about the accused and indeed his own personal interaction with the accused.

And given Rupiah's defence of and support for Chiluba in the criminal proceedings in which he has been acquitted, it will be very difficult to see how this same Rupiah will continue his case against Chiluba in the High Court to have the London judgment registered and enforced. Can Rupiah's government today tell the Zambian people that they will be happy to have the London judgment registered in our High Court and enforced against Chiluba? Can they really be trusted to champion this matter? Are we going to be surprised if tomorrow we were to wake up to be told that the Attorney General has discontinued the matter to register and enforce the London judgment against Chiluba? How can people who are today celebrating Chiluba's acquittal be trusted and tasked to champion the registration and enforcement of the London High Court judgment against Chiluba? There is definitely a serious problem here!

As for Chiluba's utterances against those who called him a thief now that he is acquitted, we leave it to his lawyers to advise him in an honest manner. We called him a thief. We challenge him to take legal action against us if he thinks that acquittal has cleared him from being called a thief. Let's meet in court since he respects court decisions. We know that his friends are in power and things may be more favourable to him everywhere but we are still ready to meet him in court even under unfavourable conditions. Chiluba is a thief who should pay back what he stole from the Zambian people as found by the London High Court judgment and other evidence that is there besides that. Not going to jail does not make Chiluba a clean person. There is no question, Chiluba ran a corrupt regime that can only be praised and defended by equally corrupt elements.

Anyway, for all that, we should not forget to honour the noble efforts of Levy Mwanawasa on this score. Without Levy's courage, the corruption of Chiluba's regime wouldn't have been known by our people. Today they can try to launder themselves but the Zambian people know who they truly are – they are nothing but devils, evil men, corrupt elements trying to wear sheep's skin​



"Hii article ina mengi ya kujifunza kwa sisi Watanzania"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hapa tatizo kubwa lililopo ni utekelezaji wa sheria na ufataji wa haki za msingi za wananchi!

Kuachiwa kwa Chiluba hauna tofauti sana na kuachiwa kwa Zombe, mazingira yanafanana sana, sasa lililopo nyuma ya yote hayo ni kutokuwa na watendaji waadilifu ambao zaidi ya kuogopa utawala wa kibinadamu wawe pia na uoga na Muumba wao kwa maana ya kwamba kuhofia maisha yao baada ya kufa!

Dunia ya sasa imebakiza waongo, wanafiki, waoga, wabinafsi na asilimia kiduchu sana ya wakweli na watenda haki ambao pia kuwapata ni ngumu kwa sababu wanapigwa vita sana!

Wanadamu wamrejee Muumba wao na kujaribu kujiepusha na mambo kama hayo ya wanasheria wanaopindisha sheria, na ndio maana majanga hayatakwisha duniani mpaka hapo wanadamu tutakapokuwa wakweli na wawazi!
 
AFR02_ZAMBIA-CORRUPTION-CHI.jpg


Former Zambian President Frederick Chiluba gestures at his residence after a corruption case against him in the capital Lusaka, August 17, 2009. Chiluba was acquitted on Monday of all charges in what was seen as a landmark corruption case against an ex-African head of state.


AFR03_ZAMBIA-CORRUPTION-CHI.jpg


Former Zambian President Frederick Chiluba addresses the media at his residence after a corruption case against him in the capital Lusaka, August 17, 2009. Chiluba was acquitted of all charges in what was seen as a landmark corruption case against an ex-African head of state.​
 
Zambia’s ex-President Frederick Chiluba has been acquitted of six counts of theft and corruption

The 'not guilty' verdict handed down by a Lusaka court yesterday, Monday, to ex-President Frederick Chiluba of Zambia, who had been accused on six counts of theft, corruption and general financial chicanery during his ten years in office, has been described as surprising. It isn't.

Anyone who has watched Zambia's ponderous legal system in action knows that there was never any real chance that the diminutive Chiluba - five feet in his stacked heels - would not get off.

Speaking figuratively, ex-President Fred knows where the bodies are buried. Speaking literally, Fred also knows where the bodies are buried. If he went to jail, he'd take far too many others with him.

I never witnessed the hundreds of pairs of designer shoes, suits, and watches, which Fred allegedly garnered during his years as President. But I did see the spoils that his wife of the time, Vera Chiluba, collected.

Chiluba (above, with current wife Regina) dumped Vera back in 2000, while he was still President. When she left Lusaka's State House it was said that she took three container-loads of personal effects with her. She moved the lot to her house in the northern city of Ndola.

In the squabble that accompanied the divorce, Vera claimed that Fred had left her penniless, To back up this assertion, she announced a house sale of all her worldly goods. The sale was slated for the Saturday. Viewing day was Friday. On Friday night she cancelled the sale, which was never a serious proposition in the first place, but not before I had seen what was on offer.

I counted hundreds of designer handbags, hundreds more pairs of shoes
There was a lot. I counted hundreds of designer handbags, hundreds more pairs of shoes. Objets d'art – the sort of stuff you see in shops off Bond Street and can't imagine anyone ever buying – littered the floors and crowded the shelves. And, stacked one on another in teetering piles were innumerable suitcases, bought by Fred and Vera to haul back to Zambia the fruits of their frequent visits to Harrods and elsewhere.

While still marvelling at this cornucopia of consumerism, I heard one of those glorious rumours that entertain those of us who tough it out in places like Zambia. It went like this:

When Vera complained to her ex-hubby that she was short of cash, Fred, in a rare fit of generosity, told her to collect a briefcase from a safe deposit in New York. In the case, he said, was 10m. Ten million Zambian Kwacha works out at well over £1,000, so Vera arranged for the briefcase to be picked up by a friend who was returning from the USA to Zambia.

The friend duly arrived, Vera opened the case with the combination Fred had given her, and found herself staring at ten million good old US dollars.

Vera knew that the banks would report the haul to the government, and that if she kept the cash in the house it would be stolen, and that if she handed it to friends it would be spent. So she was last seen rocketing around the countryside in her 4x4, visiting the only people she could trust - the various missionaries, nuns, priests and ministers in the area - and leaving a million dollars at a time in their safekeeping.

http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/52393,news,zambias-ex-president-frederick-chiluba-acquitted
 
After the death of Mwanawasa wajanja wame pata njia ya kumacquit huyu mwizi. This is a big blow to Africa. Maana angeonyeshwa mfano huyu maybe na nchi zingine zingefuata. Anyway just the fact that an ex African leader was charged of anything is an improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Back
Top Bottom
Forums
New posts
Post thread
Back