DIRECTOR of Public Prosecution (DPP) Gilbert Phiri has asked the Economic and Financial Crime’s Court to revive Honey Bee case against former Health Minister Dr Chitalu Chilufya and others on grounds that the trial court erred in law when it acquitted them before taking plea and in the absence of the consent of the DPP to prosecute.
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1ESnfFPW7r/?mibextid=oFDknk
Phiri said the matter should be brought back in court and start afresh.
He has since filed an appeal over the matter.
“I desire to be present when the court considers the appeal,” he said.
Phiri said no prejudice will be occasioned to the respondents if the application to appeal out of time is granted.
On January 26, 2021, the subordinate court in Lusaka acquitted Dr Chilufya, his former permanent secretary for administration Kakulubelwa Mulalelo, Wilson Lungu, Bonaventure Chilinde, Zakir Hussain Motala, Chomba Kaoma, Imran Lunat, Abdurrahim Motala and Honey Bee Pharmacy Limited on six counts of wilful failure to follow proceedure.
It is alleged in count one that Chilufya, Mulalelo and Lungu failed to comply with the law and applicable procedures or guidelines relating to procurement.
It is also alleged that Chilinde, Motala, Kaoma, Lunat, and Abdurrahim Motala fraudulently obtained a pharmaceutical licence without complying with lawful requirements.
Other allegations are that Chilufya, Mulalelo, Lungu, Chilinde, Motala, Kaoma, Lunat, Abdurrahim Motala and honeybee pharmacy limited Imported, stored, sold, distributed and dealt with substandard, adulterated and misbranded medicines and allied substances contrary to the laws of Zambia.
The DPP has therefore desired to appeal to the High Court against the acquittal on the grounds that the learned trial court erred in law when it acquitted the respondents before taking plea in all the six counts, in the absence of sufficient grounds permitting the complainant to withdraw the complaint.
Phiri also said the learned trial court erred in law when it acquitted them before taking plea in all the counts, notwithstanding that the charge was not signed by the complainant, public prosecutor or legal practitioner.
He said the delay to file the notice of appeal was not deliberate but was occasioned by Wilson Lungu and Zakir Hussain Motala, Imran Lunat and Abdurrahim Motala’s filing of multiple actions in the High court and the Court of Appeal which took long to be heard.
The appellant believes that the notice of appeal filed herein has high prospect of success.
Phiri submitted that no prejudice will be occasioned to the respondents if the application to appeal out of time is granted.
“It will be in the interest of justice that the application to appeal out of time is granted to the appellant to enable the appellant advance its intended appeal to this court,” he filed.
Phiri said the court has power to allow an application to appeal out of time notwithstanding that the time limited thereof may have expired.
By Lucy Phiri
Kalemba May 16, 2025
