CashGate Case: State, Defense Differs On Kalonga Sentencing Submissions Facts: Court Reserves Ruling To Wednesday

The High Court in Lilongwe has reserved its ruling to Wednesday on differences on the facts relating to sentence submissions between the State and Defense in the cashgate case of former Chief of Tourism, Leonard Kalonga.

Kalonga was convicted following his own guilty plea for defrauding government money more than K3 billion between April and September 2013.

In their submission, the defense claims that the convict had wanted to plead guilty at an earlier stage but the state (both DPP office and Anti Corruption Bureau ACB) had prevented him from doing so. But state is fighting back saying the claim is not true.

If the accused person at a very early stage pleads guilty, indicates other more offenses that were committed than were charged and cooperates with investigations, can have a lesser sentence unlike when someone plead guilty after the state has done all the work to prove someone guilty.

Now, the court has adjourned the case to Wednesday to deliver its determination whether or not the dispute is substantive enough to hear the witnesses. This followed State application of Newton Hearing for it to respond to the claims by defense as well as enable the court to have a clear factual basis for sentence.

Kachale

According to Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) Mary Kachale said at this stage, if the Judge decides to hear the facts in dispute which are essential for sentencing after Kalonga plea of guilty, means there would be ‘Newton Hearing’ whereby court will hear witnesses on facts that parties are disagreeing on.

Defense lawyer Emmanuel Theu told court that the Newton hearing application was unnecessary.

But Kachale said the state is prepared to have witnesses from ACB and DPP office to prove that the defense claims are not true. 

“If indeed it would transpire that it is true then let the court be the one to determine that, but we cannot allow such an allegation to just go without making attempts to dispute them.” Said Kachale

“We have been hearing too many allegations of perverting the course of justice. Now what we are saying and what I am saying as Director of Public Prosecution is that the submissions made by the defense seems to imply as if the office of the Director of Public Prosecution or the ACB were perverting the course of justice in preventing Leonard Kalonga from pleading guilty at an early stage. That’s too serious allegation to leave without disputing. 

If indeed Mr. Kalonga has the good course to do that then let Malawians know the truth through the court.”