The saga on whether the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) can prosecute a case without getting consent from the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) resurfaced in a case involving former ACB director general Reyneck Matemba.
Matemba is answering charges of corrupt use of power of the Office of Solicitor General at the Economic and Financial Crimes Court in Lilongwe.
He is accused of receiving $10,000 as an advantage for vetting a food rations contract for businessman Zuneth Sattar’s firm Xaviar Limited.
His case returned to court yesterday for plea taking at which time Matemba, who is representing himself, told the court that even though he was aware that Section 42 of the Corrupt Practices Act (CPA) was repealed, he still wanted to know if the graft-busting body had obtained consent from the DPP to prosecute the case.
- Advertisement -
But ACB Senior Legal and Prosecution Officer Golda Rapozo insisted that the bureau did not need such consent following the repeal of the provision in question.
- Advertisement -
Before the repeal, the section read: “No prosecution for an offence under Part IV shall be instituted except by or with the written consent of the [DPP].”
It became a centre of attention last year after that time’s DPP Steven Kayuni held his consent for ACB to prosecute former minister of lands Kezzie Msukwa on the basis that documents accompanying the request lacked some information.
Parliament then quickly moved to amend the CPA to give ACB powers to prosecute cases without seeking consent from anyone.
However, some schools of thought maintained that the Constitution, too, needed to be amended for the provision of the CPA to be effective.
- Advertisement -
In court yesterday, Rapozo said the fact that the DPP issued a certificate of committal for the case meant consent was not required.
But Matemba maintained that he was of the view that despite the repeal, ACB still needed the consent.
“I am ready to make submissions in that respect,” the former ACB boss said.
He further told the court that ACB should not confuse consent and a certificate of committal as the two are different legal requirements and serve two different purposes.
ACB is expected to respond to the preliminary issues raised by Matemba by Tuesday next week.
High Court Financial Crimes Division judge Violet Chipao has adjourned the matter to Friday next week when she is expected to make her ruling on the issues raised by Matemba.
This is the first legal challenge on ACB not seeking consent since Parliament removed the requirement from the CPA.
The bureau arrested Matemba over the allegations in August last year before he was charged with one count of corrupt use of official powers in line with Section 25 (1) of the CPA.
Matemba was released on bail and ordered to pay a K500,000 cash bond, produce two traceable and reliable sureties bonded at K2 million each, report to ACB offices once a month, surrender travelling documents to court and ask for permission to travel.
ACB also arrested former board chairperson for the Public Procurement and Disposal of Assets Authority, John Suzi- Banda, for allegedly receiving an advantage from Xaviar Limited.
