The Lusaka High Court yesterday ruled that Chiluba’s Institute for Democratic and Industrial Relations Studies should be repossessed by the government.

But former president Frederick Chiluba’s lawyer Nicholas Chanda said the judgement in default was irregularly obtained and he will be challenging it today. UNZA third year law student Leemans Nyirenda obtained the judgement in default.

He sued, in his personal capacity as a tax payer, the Jacob Titus Chiluba Foundation and its director Louis Chitolo, the National Housing Authority (NHA), former Presidential Housing Initiative (PHI) chairman Richard Sakala and the Attorney General over the unlawful and illegal channelling of public funds to the private project of building the institute.

He stated that the channelling of these funds was “not only unlawful and illegal but inhuman and malicious” as the Attorney General failed to provide him and the majority of the Zambians affordable basic needs.

Speaking after he obtained the judgement, Nyirenda said government should immediately repossess the institute. Nyirenda said the court had ruled and hoped government would not drag its feet as the matter was now over.

He said any other matters arising would be dealt with at an appropriate time. In the judgment, it was noted that the foundation, NHA and Chitolo had not entered appearance nor offered any defence to Nyirenda’s writ of summons.

It was found that the channelling of public funds from the Presidential Housing Initiative (an organisation which operated as a unit of NHA) in the sum of K517,062,496 by the NHA to the Frederick Jacob Titus Chiluba Foundation was unlawful and illegal.

The court ordered that the receiving or receipt or continued use or keeping of the said public funds in the sum of K517,062,496 by the foundation and Chitolo was also unlawful and illegal. There was also an order that Nyirenda recovers K5 million costs from the defendants or be taxed in default of agreement.

Lusaka High Court judge Anthony Nyangulu last month granted Nyirenda an interim injunction restraining the defendants from building, constructing or doing anything that would improve the property number LUS/22768, Great East Road pending the hearing and determination of the cause or until further order.

But Chanda said though the judgement in default was not served on him, he would apply to set it aside with costs. He said it was not true that they never entered appearance or failed to file defence in this matter. Chanda said they had challenged Nyirenda’s writ of summons because it was irregularly issued.

He said when the matter came up for interparte hearing before judge Nyangulu, it could not proceed because of the preliminary issue raised. “Nyirenda failed to disclose all material facts about himself and we said that was irregular,” Chanda said.

“So we applied that the writ should be set aside. Judge Nyangulu allowed this to go ahead and adjourned the matter to August 20 for hearing on this issue.

If we succeed on this matter, then all his action including the injunction falls off so it cannot be said that we have failed to defend the matter. His action is an abuse of the court process.” Chanda said they would pursue Nyirenda to the bitter end.

He said Nyirenda claimed to be a tax payer as a student but did not produce any pay slip or any evidence before court to show how he has been paying tax. Chanda said Nyirenda was mistaken if he thought that civil procedure was as simple as it was taught in a class. “I hope he knows what he is doing,” Chanda said.

“In the interim injunction that he obtained, he undertook to pay all the costs in an event that his injunction is dismissed. Construction work at the institute has halted and when it comes to costs, we will follow him up.”

Liseli Kayumba And Amos Malupenga, The Post (Lusaka), August 13, 2002