LAZ president Eddie Mwitwa’s lawyers have written to PF deputy chief whip Tutwa Ngulube asking him to publicly apologise, or face a legal suit, for alleging that their client was paid to challenge Bill 10 in court.

In a letter dated August 16, Theotis Mataka & Sampa Legal Practitioners stated that Ngulube’s statements were grossly misleading.

“We act for Mr. Eddie Mwitwa in relation to the above matter, kindly therefore note our interest.
Our client instructs that on Wednesday, 14th August 2019, through an audio recording circulating on social media attributed to you and portions of which were also aired in a video on ZNBC television news on the same day, you verbally alleged that our client, Mr. Eddie Mwitwa, who is a lawyer by profession and the President of the Law Association of Zambia is being used by the UPND to fight political battles.
You further alleged that you were also aware that, “Mr. Mwitwa was paid by a named institution to fight the Patriotic Front Government and also to embarrass government…” Our client further instructs that your statements were grossly misleading, untruthful, malicious and impute unprofessional conduct against our client, who is not only the President of the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) but also a senior member of the Zambian bar and a reputable lawyer,” read the letter.

“Had you taken care to inquire from our client before publishing the said statements, our client would have informed you that he is not and he has never been paid by anyone for discharging his duties as President of LAZ and that he is not and has never been used by the United Party for National Development (UPND) or indeed any other political party or institution to initiate or fight political battles. Our client also informs us that you also made other misrepresentations in the said audio recording about our client, which you knew or ought to have known as a member of parliament and a member of LAZ, were false and malicious.”

The lawyers asked Ngulube to publicly apologize within 24 hours.

“Your allegations that our client was paid by “a named institution” were maliciously calculated to be vague and misleading as you did not name this faceless institution you refer to nor did you gave any details of this alleged payment. Further, you deliberately did not substantiate your allegations that our client is being used by the UPND. All this was deliberately calculated to effect maximum damage to our client’s reputation and professional standing,” read the letter.

“Our client demands that you issue an immediate public apology to our client in both the public and private print and electronic media and by way of a letter addressed directly to our client, failure to which our client will be compelled to exercise his right to commence the necessary legal action against you without further recourse to you. We also demand that you inform us of how you intend to compensate our client for the said defamatory statements within the next 24 hours.”