ECONOMIC CRIMES COURT REJECTS MILINGO’S BID TO STOP US$40M FOERFEITURE

By GRACE CHAILE

THE Economic and Financial Crimes Court has declined to stay proceedings in a matter in which the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has applied for the forfeiture to the State of US$40 million dollars deposited in three accounts belonging to former KCM provisional liquidator, Milingo Lungu.

Mr Lungu, had filed an application for an order staying proceedings pending determination of his appeal against the Economic and Financial Crimes Court’s ruling dated August 3,2023, in which it held that it had jurisdiction to determine the matter. 

The Economic and Financial Crimes Court dismissed the preliminary issues raised by Mr Lungu in which he contended that the same court did not have jurisdiction to determine the DPP’s application on the basis of the cases that are pending determination in other courts.

In his application, Mr Lungu argued that his appeal would be rendered an academic exercise if the Court of Appeal pronounced that the Economic and Financial Crimes Court was not properly constituted.

But Judges Pixie Yangailo, Ann Malata-Ononuju and Mwanajiti Mabbolobbolo in their ruling said the appeal would not succeed and only served to protract the judicial proceedings before court. 

“Furthermore, we have combed through the affidavits, skeleton arguments and submissions and have found no exceptional circumstances or ambit of the requirements set out in the plethora of authorities for grant of stay of proceedings pending appeal,” said the court.

In this matter, the DPP seeks an order for the three accounts alleged with tainted property, to be forfeited to the State, pursuant to Section 29 and 31 of the forfeiture of proceeds of Crime

According to DEC investigations,it is alleged that Mr Lungu took advantage of his position as KCM liquidator and stole $40 million belonging to the mining firm. The said accounts were opened in 2021.

Mr Lungu has however declined any illegal dealings in respect of the funds.

He stated that he is a preferential creditor and has a bona fide claim of right to transfer the funds for payment or security persians to his right of remuneration.

[/ihc-hide-content