JOIN DRIVERN TAXI AS PARTNER DRIVER TODAY!
The Tribunal investigating Justice Minister Wynter Kabimba of alleged abuse of office and breach of Oath of Secrecy has this morning heard that the legal opinion rendered by Solicitor General Musa Mwenye to Mr. Kabimba was used in both the Dora Siliya and others case and the Nevers Mumba contempt of court case.
Testifying this morning at the tribunal hearing chaired by Supreme Court Judge Evans Hamaundu, Patriotic Front (PF) Petauke Central losing candidate in the 2011 general elections Leonard Banda has disclosed that he gave consent to use of the government legal opinion in the Dora Siliya and others case after he was made aware of the opinion by his representative counsel Bonaventure Mutale of Ellis and Company law firm.
Mr. Banda 34, of House Number 366 Kanjoka road Petauke, has told the tribunal that in the Dora Siliya and others case the legal opinion was solely used as part of the bundle of documents in his motion of his party to bar Dora Siliya and others, whose parliamentary seats were nullified on grounds of corruption, from re-contesting the same parliamentary seats.
Mr. Banda was being led in examination in chief by Judge Hamaundu, him being a witness the tribunal itself had summoned.
In cross examination by the complaint’s counsel Makebi Zulu, Mr. Banda also disclosed that he did not pay for the legal opinion individually in the said two cases in which the government legal opinion is said to have been used.
When asked whether he derived any advantage as a result of the use of the government legal opinion in the Nevers Mumba contempt of court case in which he was the appellant, Mr. Banda told the tribunal that he did not as an individual derive any benefits from the legal opinion.
And in cross examination led by the respondent’s lawyer Mr. Mutale, Mr. Banda further told the tribunal that the said government legal opinion was not used in any other cases besides the Dora Siliya and others case and the Nevers Mumba contempt of Court case.
By broadcast time, after adjourning for about an hour the tribunal was scheduled to decide as to whether another witness was going to be summoned to give further evidence or not.
