The court case involving the Malawi’s former President Bakili Muluzi has taken another twist as reports say that the legal affairs committee will meet the Anti- Corruption Bureau (ACB) to withdraw the case.
For over six years, Muluzi has been answering charges of corruption in which he is accused of squandering public funds amounting to 1.7 billion Kwacha.
Reports that Malawi24 has been following show that with a strenuous effort from government, the case might be dropped.
Reports suggest that this is due to the cordial relationship the current government has with the 72 year old.
The case which the ex Malawi leader claims was politically driven by late President Bingu wa Mutharika, whom he was not in terms with was recently in the media as Chief Justice Andrew Nyirenda opted to refer back to the High Court his (Muluzi) application or a constitutional review on the corruption case.
Meanwhile, Deputy chairperson for legal affairs committee Maxwell Thyolera says their committee does not know anything on the matter to have the case withdrawn.
“We are not aware of the withdrawal of the former president Muluzi case maybe the Director of Public Procecution (DPP) is at a better position to know and give a better answer on the matter,” said Thyolela.
He further said that the DPP has to convince and give reasonable statements to Parliament on whether to withdraw the case or not but at the moment their committee has not received any information on the withdrawal.
There are many corruption cases including cashgate cases of which the IMF has asked Malawi government to quicken or else they will not resume their budgetary support to Malawi.
Muluzi together with Violet Whisky 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.
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 last week
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.