[civsoc-mw] The allogance of Chisale

Tue Oct 6 19:09:44 CAT 2020

My friend. How old are you? Sacheza zedi  demedit

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020, 11:14 KPD, <maluwakpd at gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually it is not only the president who is exempted from paid customs
> duty. Diplomats and people working under international bodies are allowed
> to import vehicles and other items for their personal use duty free.
> However, MRA collects duty at the time such goods are sold off or given to
> other parties. Whether the importer dies or not is not even an issue.
>
> MRA impounded the vehicles for collection of customs duty. Not
> withstanding where Bingu got the money to import 125 vehicles.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 6 Oct 2020, 08:19 Keyboard Boyd Kilembey, <kkilembe at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Be wary of lawyers. They are the most corrupt after doctors and
>> policemen. Don't trust what they say. Most of them can sell their mother's
>> at a fee.  Don't say I didn't warn you.
>>
>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2020, 08:10 KPD, <maluwakpd at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> KB
>>>
>>> I was shocked when MRA lawyers did not appeal that judgement.
>>>
>>> I have read his response here and it is all over the place. What is it
>>> that Parliament should change?
>>>
>>> The provision is straight forward. The president doesn't pay customs
>>> duty for anything he imports for personal use. This means he pays customs
>>> duty for anything that he imports and it is not for his personal use.
>>>
>>> Some of these judgements are very demoralizing to hardworking honest
>>> civil servants who want Malawi to progress.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2020, 07:37 Keyboard Boyd Kilembey, <kkilembe at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Jaji had all the opportunity of righting a wrong or wronging a
>>>> right bit he chose to be on the side of the criminals who steal from hewe
>>>> and likaka povos using law technicalities. It was obvious bingu was not
>>>> using the cars personally. We all know why MRA did not charge duty.
>>>> Shifting the blame to parliament to make new laws was dereliction of duty.
>>>> The law allowed importation for personal use. All the judge had to do was
>>>> establish if the goofs imported were being used for personal use.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2020, 06:01 KPD, <maluwakpd at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Your honour,
>>>>>
>>>>> The part that is in question is, "For personal use"
>>>>>
>>>>> The question was to interpret what  does, "personal use" mean and
>>>>> whether anyone can reasonably say ordering 125 vehicles can be for
>>>>> "personal use"
>>>>>
>>>>> My simple interpretation is that if the president orders a car for me,
>>>>> he should pay customs duty. Any reasonable person can not say the car is
>>>>> for the president's personal use when it is clear that he bought it for me
>>>>> and not himself.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is why I am saying Chisale is smiling because of your judgement
>>>>> on 125 for personal use. The president's privileges were used to import
>>>>> thousands of bags of cement which were sold to the public. And you say it
>>>>> is harassment if MRA demands duty.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 6 Oct 2020, 05:22 Dunstain Mwaungulu, <
>>>>> dfmwaungulu at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I never said what you say when you read the judgment away from the
>>>>>> hype you say. The constitutionality of two very clear statutes that protect
>>>>>> the President from duty was never an issue before me and I never decided
>>>>>> it. I can produce the judgment to anyone who requests for it to your email
>>>>>> box. In summary, this is, and I will avoid the politics of successor
>>>>>> governments - since the Press Trust Reconstruction Act - to, in violation
>>>>>> of human rights - to interfere with property rights of their opponents. I
>>>>>> also say this, because, I am probably one of the few judges, if more,
>>>>>> whodoes not start from the LAW paradigm but the right paradigm. This is
>>>>>> because we are required by the Constitution to protect ALL RIGHTS created
>>>>>> under the CONSTITITION and LAWS of Malawi. More over we are required to
>>>>>> enforce and uphold the law and the Constitutio unde the Constitution by our
>>>>>> oath and SEPARATE STATUS, DUTY AND FUNCTIONS in Section 9 of
>>>>>> the Constitution. So here is what I decided, briefly. The action before me
>>>>>> was to decide the constitutionality of an action of government - the MRA -
>>>>>> to impound or harass Dr. Peter Mutharika over motor vehicles of his
>>>>>> deceased brother by judicial review.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. In a judicial review, the complainant is the State, in this case
>>>>>> Dr. Peter Peter Mutharika. The matter is labelled, if you check, "In the
>>>>>> Matter of the State of the State v The Commisdioner of Revenue  ex parte
>>>>>> Mutharika. It is the State complaining against the government for its
>>>>>> unlawful actions.
>>>>>> 2. In an action where the State, not government is being complained
>>>>>> of, the government cannot discuss the legality of the laws it promulgated.
>>>>>> So naturally, the constitutionality of the Customs and Excise Act  and the
>>>>>> President Privileges snd Immunities Act could not be raised. Peter could
>>>>>> not raise it either because this contention was that the government had
>>>>>> acted unlawfully.
>>>>>> 3. The first point for consideration  - not seen by both parties -
>>>>>> was whether government, the MRA, directed their actions to the right
>>>>>> person. If it was not the right person, the government, the MRA, was
>>>>>> hounding and harassing Peter unconstitutionally and unlawfully and should
>>>>>> be stopped right in their pants - just as my decision in the Press Trust
>>>>>> Reconstruction Act  - reversed by the Suoreme Court - on other grounds -
>>>>>> because it violated the law in three respects.
>>>>>> 4. First, because it was interference in the rights of the estate of
>>>>>> Dr. Bingu which, as we see shortly, did not and could not  except by will
>>>>>> and there was none proved, under the Deceased Estates Wills and Inheritance
>>>>>> Act could never as in ever devolve to siblings until it was shown there
>>>>>> were no parents, children, dependants and grandchildren of Dr. Bingu. It
>>>>>> was common knowledge that Dr Bingu had children and grandchildren who, even
>>>>>> if there  was just one, could inherit the WHOLE estate.
>>>>>> 5. The action by MRA was an action which itself was required to
>>>>>> uphold. The sections directing them to offer duty free facilities  was
>>>>>> directed directly at them. How could they with impunity choose to neglect
>>>>>> the law?
>>>>>> 6. This goes to my articulated reasons why I could not intervene with
>>>>>> the Act. First, I noted that the reason why there was such a provision was
>>>>>> because the Act, probably passed in the 1960s, "recognised" the doctrine
>>>>>> that the sovereign does not pay taxes.
>>>>>> 7. The two statutes covered ALL goods from a needle to anything else
>>>>>> the President acquired. I decided correctly, that it cannot really be the
>>>>>> duty of the courts to determine what tupe of goods - in thousands of not
>>>>>> millions and what quantity of goods to exclude or decide upon what is
>>>>>> reasonable. Specifically, the  privilege statute quantified the number of
>>>>>> cars for the VP and NEVER as in EVER limited the President's number. In
>>>>>> short, these are policy matters of policy - budget and economics which
>>>>>> judges do not know and are under oath not required to use in resolution of
>>>>>> disputes.
>>>>>> 8. The Court could have listened to evidence on the matter if it was
>>>>>> proffered by MRA.
>>>>>> 9. So I determined that it was a matter for Parliament  - not the
>>>>>> Court to decide. As you would have it Predident Joyce Banda and the
>>>>>> Legislature could not - for good reasons known to them - dare to change the
>>>>>> law and she and Peter took on to use it  for a legitimate right, as we see
>>>>>> shortly, to use its openendedness.
>>>>>> 10. The two sections can be viewed analytically from a power point to
>>>>>> raise the questions you well observe. But they create a right personal to
>>>>>> the president. We are called upon to uphold rights under the Constitution
>>>>>> and under the law.
>>>>>> 11. In this case, the rights and liabilities of the Bingu Estate
>>>>>> insured to the Adminstrator/Adminstrstrix or Executrix/Executrix  - not
>>>>>> Peter - of the Estate. In an earlier order, I ruled that lawyers had misled
>>>>>> the Court in obtaining letters of administration from the Zomba Registry
>>>>>> when the law prohibited District Registries from issuing such letters. The
>>>>>> consequences of this that only the people in the first and second circle -
>>>>>> who did not include siblings, the third circle where Peter belonged - could
>>>>>> obtain letters of administration. SO THE GOVERNMENT  - THROUGH RMA - WAS
>>>>>> GROSSLY OUT OF COLOUR TO HARRASS PETER ON HIS RIGHTS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> QED
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is very different from the hyperbole you want to create. I will
>>>>>> send the judgment to your inbox or email if you send addresses.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> THANK YOU FOR READING.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 5 Oct 2020, 08:05 KPD, <maluwakpd at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For a person who has denied Malawians the desperately needed revenue
>>>>>>> by colluding with Indians to avoid paying customs duty on imported cement,
>>>>>>> Chisale is just laughing at ACBand Directorate of public prosecution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All this thanks to Judge Dunstan Mwaungulu who believes that
>>>>>>> ordering 125 vehicles by a president duty free is allowed by the
>>>>>>> constitution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't know which part of the constitution was used to arrive at
>>>>>>> his judgement. The constitution clearly said for personal use. Just
>>>>>>> Mwaungulu basically interpreted it as, "the president is allowed to import
>>>>>>> anything in any quality duty free"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the judgement was never appealed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> A few years down the line here is Peter Mutharika who has used this
>>>>>>> privilege through his proxy to deny Malawians billions of Kwacha in customs
>>>>>>> duty revenue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I see another Mwaungulu judge setting Chisale free and saying there
>>>>>>> was nothing wrong for Mutharika important millions of bags of cement for
>>>>>>> 'personal' use.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But Malawi. Where is God when we need him most?
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> civsoc-mw mailing list
>>>>>>> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
>>>>>>> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>,
>>>>>> and is
>>>>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>>>>> civsoc-mw mailing list
>>>>>> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
>>>>>> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>,
>>>>> and is
>>>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>>>> civsoc-mw mailing list
>>>>> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
>>>>> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>>>> is
>>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>>> civsoc-mw mailing list
>>>> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
>>>> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>>> is
>>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>>> civsoc-mw mailing list
>>> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
>>> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and
>> is
>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>> civsoc-mw mailing list
>> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
>> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
> civsoc-mw mailing list
> civsoc-mw at sdnp.org.mw
> http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/mailman/listinfo/civsoc-mw
>

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/pipermail/civsoc-mw/attachments/20201006/6510b50a/attachment-0001.htm>