FORMER President Edgar Lungu’s daughter Chiyeso Lungu has submitted in court that her parents availed K3million for purchase of one of properties the State had deemed a proceed of crime.
Ms Lungu, a lawyer admitted to the bar in 2018, has further submitted in court that it is not a crime for responsible parents to support their children in the manner her parents have consistently done.
“I have no reasonable basis to suspect or doubt my parents’ capacity to raise K3, 000, 000 which they availed me for purchasing the first property[piece of land],” she submits in her court documents.
Ms Lungu is challenging the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Gilbert Phiri’s notice of motion seeking a non-conviction forfeiture of her properties which the State has deemed tainted.
The seized propeties include two farms with a high-cost house, four chicken runs and three flats in Lusaka’s State Lodge area, all valued at K9, 375, 438.62, and acquired between 2013 and 2021.
But opposition the lawsuit, Ms Lungu submits before the Economic and Financial Crimes Court that her parents Edgar Lungu and Esther paid K3million for the purchase of one of the properties the State wants forfeited for being tainted.
She submits that during interrogations, she had informed the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) that consideration for the purchase of the first property was paid by Mr Lungu and former first lady Esther in 2017.
Ms Lungu wonders why DEC investigations officer Emmanuel Khondowe never submitted in court that she disclosed the source of income for the said property.
“I did state that the consideration for the purchase of the first property was paid by my parents Edgar and Esther Lungu and he opted to conceal or withhold the information,” she submits.
Ms Lungu argues that the failure to inform the court was either a dereliction of duty on his part or on the part of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
She submits that the DPP’s application seeks to demonstrate that she owns two properties namely Lot/9390/M containing a high cost house and four chicken runs and property number LN_79093/ housing three flats in State lodge.
“I indeed bought all that piece of land at a cost of K3, 000, 000 in April 2017.
“On September 9, 2022 when Mr Khondowe invited me for investigations at DEC, I did state that the consideration for the purchase of the first property was paid by my parents and he opted to conceal or withhold the information,” she states.
Ms Lungu said Mr Khondowe’s failure to inform the court of what she explained to him during the inquiry was either a dereliction of duty if not mere calculation intended to mislead the court.
She details how her father, a former Minister of Home Affairs, rose through the ranks and worked to earn what he has.
“I know my father to have been an accomplished legal practitioner who was called to the bar in 1981. In addition to him working as a legal practitioner in various institutions for a period of 30 years,” she adds.
Mr Lungu also served in various government portfolios from being Chawama MP in 2011 and later holding the office of deputy minister in the vice president’s office in the same year.
“My father was promoted to a position of Minister of Home Affairs in July 2012 and became Minister of Defense in December 2013, later functioning as the acting Republican President during [late] President Michael Chilufya Sara’s tenure in office in 2013 to 2014 at which time he also held the office of Minister of Justice from August 2014,” Ms Lungu says.
She says on January 25, 2015, Mr Lungu, ascended to the office of the President of the republic of Zambia becoming 6th president, an office held for seven years.
“Throughout my childhood during which I had no income earning capacity, I have continued access to various facilities and material possessions such as quality education, clothing, paid medical care, recreation and safe and clean housing which have all been above my earning capacity, all of which has been as a result of my parents’ financial ability to support my livelihood,” she says.
Ms Lungu submits it is not a crime for responsible parents to support their children in the manner my parents have consistently done and that the court case against her falls within the category of malicious prosecution or abuse of court process.
“At the time I was purchasing the first property it was already developed with improvements being referred to as “high-cost house”and the four chicken runs.
“Efforts(by DEC) to differentiate the cost of purchasing and construction of the house is as a result of negligence, innocent mistakes or are carefully calculated at misleading the Court,” the document reads.
She also explains how she bought one of the pieces of land in contention.
” Later in 2019, I applied to the ministry of lands, natural resources and environmental protection that I be allocated the piece of land which is in front of the first property on August 20, 2020, which I was given an invitation to treat for property no. LUSAK/LN_79093 and I would be given an offer letter upon payment of K5, 638. 68.
“On September 15, 2020 I paid the said amount to the ministry of lands and the commissioner of lands proceeded to issue me an offer letter,” Ms Lungu submits.
She adds that as an officer of court practicing law in the firm of Messrs Muyatwa legal practitioners from where she earns a monthly salary, she had full capacity to pay K5, 638. 68.
“I have not built any flats on the second property depositions by Khondowe alleging that I have built 3 flats on the second property are either emanating from poor or incoherent investigations or are designed to create misrepresentations before this court, ” the lawyer argues.
Ms Lungu further contends that the DPP cannot categorise her captioned property as tainted without the court making such determination.
“Both properties are mine and do not form proceeds of crime as they were lawfully purchased with legal and traceable sources of income.
“This court is urged to hold that the DPP’s application has failed to outline what offence was committed by Ms Chiyeso Lungu in connection with the properties sought to be forfeited to the State.
“The DPP brought no piece or trace of evidence pointing to either of the four elements of tainted property as such the standard required. As such, the court is beseeched to dismiss the application with costs to the interested party,” she submits.
(Mwebantu, Friday, 22nd September, 2023)