President Sata testifies in his defamation case

Zambia’s President Michael Sata today broke the record in the history of the country when he appeared to testify in the Courts of law where he has sued a private Newspaper, Daily Nation for defamation in his personal capacity.

The case involves an article The Daily Nation published on its edition of  May 16, 2012 in which it alleged that the decision by the Development Bank of Zambia to cancel instructions of engagement of their lawyers Malambo and Company was a corrupt act done by the President.

In the article the Newspaper quoted Dr. Choolwe Beyani, an Academician alleged that the President’s decision was merely intended to protect his criminal friends namely Fred Mmembe, Mutembo Nchito and Nchima Nchito who owe DBZ more than 14 million kwacha

President Sata arrived at court mid-morning and upon entering the Court demanded that the presiding High Court Judge, Florence Lengalenga  starts the proceedings.

Taking the witness stand, President Sata told the court that he felt aggrieved by the article which he said was a lie and had tarnished his image. He also said Newspapers write lies in order to make sales.

He said the Newspaper aught to have gotten his comment before publishing the story.

President Sata said the courts need to stop the trend of writing lies by Newspapers by imposing punishment. He refused ever interfering in the operations of DBZ saying he was not even President when Fred M’membe and the Nchito brothers got the loan from the bank.

According to the country’s laws a sitting president enjoys immunity and cannot be subjected to any court proceedings unless when the immunity is lifted.

Therefore the Michael Sata case is unprecedented, he is demanding 500, 000 kwacha for damages from the Newspaper.

The matter was adjourned to June 24th and 26th for continued trial  after the Newspaper asked for time to reenforce its legal team for cross examining President Sata.

Meanwhile the Foundation for Democratic Foundation (FODEP) says it will closely follow the matter.

This is so because the case is unique and unprecedented and exposes the weaknesses in Zambia’s legal framework. The fact that the current legal framework under Article 43 (1) and (2) of the current Constitution protects a sitting President from legal proceedings but is mute on what happens if the sitting President wants to take legal action against a citizen exposes its greatest weakness in a democratic society like ours. Instead, the current law promotes the administration of selective justice where some people are above the law while others are under the law which is undemocratic and against the principles of the rule of law.

This case alone highlights a constitutional lacuna in the sense that an aggrieved citizen cannot institute legal suit against a sitting President but a sitting President can institute legal action against a citizen when aggrieved. This is the reason Zambians should intensify their demand for a new people driven constitution to seal up such constitutional gaps that favors one section of society against the other.

We hope that the judge handling the matter will not be intimidated to dispense justice on such a classic case but be overboard especially that the person involved in the case is the appointing authority. We further pray that the case will not send intimidatory signals to upcoming media institutions from carrying out their functions as mirrors of society. Finally, we hope this case will not stifle press freedom and freedom of expression in Zambia due to fears of facing the powerful in society.

.