LAZ summons Mutembo Nchito

The Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has given Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Mutembo Nchito 14 day’s ultimatum to exculpate himself over complaints of professional misconduct leveled against him by parliamentary select committee Chairperson Lucky Mulusa.
Mr. Mulusa accused Mr. Nchito of misleading the parliamentary select committee for him to get the position of Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) job when he appeared before it.
According to a letter written by LAZ’s Legal Practitioners Committee and signed by Sipelile Mwilwa who is the administrative assistant on behalf of the honorary secretary (Midlands) and copied to Mr. Mulusa, LAZ says that the committee would proceed to hear and determine the complaint in absence of his response.
“Please find enclosed herewith copy of a complaint received against yourselves. Kindly let us have (2) two copies of your response within the next 14 days from the date thereof. Please note that the committee may proceed to hear and determine the complainant in absence of your response,” the letter read in part.
Solwezi Central Member of Parliament Lack Mulusa last week complained to the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ)’s Legal Practitioners Committee against the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Mutembo Nchito for professional misconduct.
According to a complaint letter written to LAZ dated 26th April 2013 and addressed to the honorary Secretary, Mr. Mulusa complained that Mr. Nchito misled the Parliamentary Select Committee regarding his intentions seeking the job of DPP.
He also stated that Mr. Nchito’s inability to exercise his prosecutorial duties in a manner that was consistent with the rule of law and upholding of natural justice specifically regarding his failure to recuse himself in matters in which he had personal interests was worrying.
“The purpose of writing this letter is to lay two complaints against your member one Mutembo Nchito, the current Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP),” said Mr. Mulusa.
He said that it was important for LAZ to consider instituting disciplinary proceedings that should determine Mr. Nchito’s sincerity during the process of ratification, his professional conduct as the DPP as well as his suitability to continue holding the office of the DPP.
Mr. Mulusa, further, said that it was his request on behalf of the voiceless, that if found wanting, the Legal Practitioners’ Committee should also take necessary pronouncements and further  apply suitable sanctions against Mr. Nchito.
He said that further more LAZ should also make recommendations to appropriate institutions such as the Presidency, the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC) and the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) such that necessary measure could be instituted to serve the justice system of the country.
Mr. Mulusa said that he was motivated to write LAZ because the office of the DPP occupied a formidable position in the administration of criminal justice of the nation.
“I am further motivated by my awareness that the decisions taken by the DPP’s office may profoundly affect the lives of others and those connected to them as well as society at large. Against this background, it is of utmost importance that any of your members holding that office should bring competency and good character to the office,” he said.
He said that those holding  the office of DPP should possess the utmost integrity as well as the ability to exercise his or her prosecutorial duties fairly and in a manner that was consistent with the rule of law and the upholding of natural justice.
Mr. Mulusa also informed LAZ that Mr. Nchito had used his position to either punish a perceived enemy or to serve himself from consequences of his past misconduct.
“Following the removal of the former President Rupiah Banda’s immunity, Mr. Nchito chose personally to lead the prosecution team despite having stated that such was one case where he would recuse himself,” he said.
He also said that Mr. Nchito’s conduct in the Rajan Mahtani forgery case where he issued two nolle prosequi to his creditor the chairman of Finance Bank Zambia Limited in exchange of a discontinuation of a legal suit and ultimately forbearance of an over draft facility involving US$4.2 million was highly questionable and a form of corruption.