It is a case that has been there for six years now and the legal committee at the Parliament is not happy at all that ex Malawi President, Bakili Muluzi has his MK1.7 Billion case keep stalling up to now due to a series of legal activities.
Muluzi is together with Violet Whisky answering the charges which remain pegged at a whooping MK1.7 Billion.
Reports Malawi24 has been following show that the Parliamentary Legal Affairs Committee wants the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) to state why the case has been dormant for such a ‘long period’.
When speaking to the media the committee’s, Chairperson Lewis Chakwantha hinted on their quest to have the graft busting body tell the nation as what has been the reasons for the case to delay in that sort and why the 72 year old former President has not yet faced justice.
This comes at a time when commentators have argued that the case which Muluzi has been protesting as politically motivated is stalling because the ex Malawi leader has been in good terms with the current regime led by Peter Mutharika despite the case starting at a time when his late brother, Bingu wa Mutharika led the nation before his demise in 2012.
Just recently, Chief Justice Andrew Nyirenda referred back to the High Court Muluzi’s for a constitutional review on the case.
The two wanted the Supreme Court to direct that the High Court, sitting as a constitutional court, should determine that the charges were politically motivated and, therefore, should be dismissed.
Muluzi’s lawyer, Lawyer Tamando Chokotho applied to have the matter referred for constitutional review, alleging that the whole trial against him perverts the Constitution in many respects
But Nyirenda has since faulted the High Court for referring the matter to the highest court before weighing the arguments.
“This was a misdirection on the part of the court. The learned judge was supposed to decide whether it is necessary or not necessary for the matter to be submitted to the Chief Justice for further consideration. For all these reasons, this matter is returned to the original court for the learned judge to determine as he might consider appropriate,” the Chief Justice said in his ruling on Thursday.
The Chief Justice argues that the ex President has remained of the view that the process resulted in violation of the Constitution because the former Attorney General and the former Director of the Anti-Corruption Bureau’s (ACB) conduct, in attempting to fabricate evidence against Muluzi, undermined his right to a fair trial under Section 42(2) (f) of the Constitution.
The case has been stalling due to among other things Muluzi’s deteriorating health and other legal processes.