By CHARLES MUSONDA
THE Lusaka Magistrates’ Court has warned the State against making undertakings it cannot fulfill in a case involving former Mandevu aspiring parliamentary candidate Amon Maviya.
In this case Maviya is accused of forgery, uttering false documents, obtaining goods by false pretences, and allegedly obtaining K89, 705.00 and US$3,500 cash from a Chinese national Min Jae Kwon by allegedly falsely pretending that he had Mukula logs and authority from ZAFFICO to sell when in fact not.
Magistrate Tabitha Mulenga issued the warning yesterday after public prosecutor Joe Phiri told the court that the State was not ready to proceed as the two remaining witnesses were not present.
Mr. Phiri said a witness from Copperbelt had travelled outside the country and was in quarantine while another one from the Ministry of Lands has been working outside Lusaka.
He said if they are given next week they will be available and applied for an adjournment.
In her ruling, Ms. Mulenga reminded Mr. Phiri that last Wednesday he made an undertaking that if the two witnesses would not be available yesterday the State would close its case.
She told Mr. Phiri not to even talk about justice because no one forced him to make an undertaking to close the case in the witnesses’ absence.
She however allowed the adjournment because of the Covid-19 era and on condition that the witness who is said to have travelled out of Zambia must show proof of travel failure to which he shall not testify.
Ms. Mulenga said if both witnesses shall not be available next Wednesday September 29, 2021, the State will close its case.
At the last sitting an arresting officer said he was not aware that the complainant did not receive any document from Maviya.
Michael Phiri told the court that he was not aware that Mr. Min testified that he never received any document from the accused person.
In cross-examination by defence lawyer Agrippa Malando of the Legal Aid Board, Mr. Phiri further said he did not have any document or proof to show that Mr. Min paid Maviya the K89, 705.00 and US$3,500 cash.
He also admitted that he did not give the documents in dispute to a forensic expert to prove that the handwriting on them was for Maviya nor did he take the accused person’s finger prints.
Asked if he searched Maviya’s home and office to access computers allegedly used to generate the same documents, Mr. Phiri said he did not. He however told the court that the documents in question were printed from Mr. Min’s mobile phone.
Mr. Phiri further said he was not aware that there was a Mr. Kabwe who the complainant said gave him the documents and not Maviya.
COURT WARNS STATE IN MAVIYA CASE
