GOOD Governance Zambia Limited has filed a lawsuit against the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) demanding for the release of its motor vehicles as they are not government property.
But ACC has submitted in its defence that the issuance of the restriction notice of March 9, 2022 was done in accordance to the provisions of section 60 of the ACC Act no. 2012.
The company involved conducting civic education activities contends that the restriction notices issued by ACC have expired and have no legal effect in accordance with section 60(3) (a) of the ACC act no. 3 of 2012 of the laws of Zambia.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”4,5,6″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
It wants the Economic and Financial Crimes Court-High Court Division, to declare that the motor vehicles registration numbers BAT 2590 ZM, BAT 2482 ZM, BAR 7507 ZM, BAR 7508 ZM, BAR 7510 ZM, BAR 7514 ZM and BAR 7572 ZM which were bought by the company are not government vehicles and were never obtained from the Government of Zambia or from any parastatal body in Zambia.
It also seeks a declaratory order declaring that the said motor vehicles are not proceeds of crime as the same were not derived using stolen money or proceeds of crime.
And that they were not acquired to conceal money laundering hence not liable to forfeiture under the Prohibition and Prevention of Money laundering Act no. 14 of 2001 of the laws of Zambia.
Good Governance wants a Court to order declaring that the restriction notices issued by the ACC dated March 9, 2022 relating to the said motor vehicles have expired and have no legal effect in accordance with section 60 (3) (a) of the ACC act no. 3 of 2012.
Good Governance in its statement of claim stated that in March ,2022, officers from Drug Enforcement Commission Anti money laundering unit summoned all the shareholders and directors of the company and interrogated them on the five vehicles which the plaintiff used in different parts of the country while conducting civic education activities.
The company was informed that there was information that the motor vehicles in question were acquired from Government.
It stated that the investive wing confirmed with the local car dealer that the vehicles were bought locally and importation documents including payment receipts were given to the officers by the car dealer.
“The plaintiff will aver and prove at trial that when the accusation of the vehicles being owned by government was proved to be untrue, the defendants officers now changed the story saying they were now investigating the source of the money used to purchase the motor vehicles,” it stated.
[/ihc-hide-content]
