by Abraham Kalito on 19 Jul 2018by Mukosha Funga on 19 Jul 2018by Sipilisiwe Ncube on 19 Jul 2018by Sipilisiwe Ncube on 19 Jul 2018
- Goal Diggers
by Sipilisiwe Ncube on 18 Jul 2018by Abraham Kalito on 18 Jul 2018by Abraham Kalito on 17 Jul 2018by Abraham Kalito on 16 Jul 2018
by Zondiwe Mbewe on 19 Jul 2018by Zondiwe Mbewe on 18 Jul 2018by Zondiwe Mbewe on 18 Jul 2018by Zondiwe Mbewe on 17 Jul 2018
- Editor's Choice
by Percy Chanda, UPND on 15 Jun 2018by Elias Munshya on 11 Jun 2018by Akashambatwa Mbikusita-Lewanika on 31 May 2018by Chibamba Kanyama on 25 May 2018
by Sipilisiwe Ncube on 19 Jul 2018by Mirriam Chabala on 13 Jul 2018by Chense Chola on 7 Jul 2018by Mirriam Chabala on 22 Jun 2018
- Guest Diggers
by Sampa Kabwela on 14 Jul 2018by Chibamba Kanyama on 9 Jul 2018by Netsanet Belay - Amnesty International on 25 Jun 2018by Kalaki on 24 Jun 2018
Chiluba’s children challenge Tedworth forfeitureBy Elias Banda on 21 Jan 2017
FREDERICK Chiluba’s children have petitioned the Lusaka High Court to reverse the Supreme Court’s order to forfeit Tedworth Properties Inc to the state saying they were not heard.
In their petition, Tedworth director Faustine Kabwe is the first petitioner while Patrice Kaindu Chiluba and Darlington Nkonde Chiluba are second and third petitioners, citing the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Attorney General.
The petitioners want a declaration that they were not given a free and fair hearing because one of the Supreme Court judges comprising the quorum that determined the appeal did not hear Tedworth.
They are also seeking a court order restraining the ACC from disposing off or dealing with the properties or rental income from Tedworth until after hearing and determination of the petition.
In an affidavit, Kabwe stated that Patrice and Darlington joined the petition as Chiluba’s personal representatives and beneficiaries.
She stated that in 2003, the ACC issued a notice to Tedworth stating that properties were forfeited to the State but Tedworth challenged the notice of forfeiture in the High Court on grounds that it was illegal.
Kabwe further stated that although the appeal was heard by a quorum of Chief Justice Irene Mambilima, judges Royda Kaoma and Evans Hamaundu, judge Jones Chinyama; who was part of the quorum when the judgment was delivered, was not among the judges that heard the appeal.
She stated that the Supreme Court violated the principles of natural justice and the petitioners’ right to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial court.
Kabwe stated that the Supreme Court’s actions offended the basic principle of judicial procedure that “the one who decides must hear”.
“Further, the forfeiture did not arise from an order of court either under civil process or criminal proceedings, which resulted in a conviction,” read the petition in part.
Kabwe stated that only an Act by the authority of Parliament could provide for forfeiture and that such an Act must then provide for adequate compensation.Related Items
Subscribe for email alerts
Weekly Most Digged
ArchivesAug0 PostsSep0 PostsOct0 PostsNov0 PostsDec0 Posts
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
The News Diggers
Deputy News Editor
Plot No. Lus/9812/649-MC8
off Alex Chola Road
P.O. Box 32147
Telephone or WhatsApp:
+26-097-7708285, 095-3424603, 096-5815078
diggers [at] diggers [dot] news
editor [at] diggers [dot] news
Send this to a friend