| Chapter 2: | Conceptual Issues in Definitions of Corruption and Good Governance |
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
Here, it is suffice to say, the only statutory defence allowed under the Anti-Corruption Commission Act 1996 is that the gratification offered or accepted was an entertainment or a casual gift.73 Whereas Section 3 of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act 1996 spells out a statutory definition of ‘casual gift’, the statute does not define what constitutes ‘an entertainment’. It is submitted that the legislative draftsman did not give thoughtful consideration to such issues and that the term entertainment should have been defined.
As a general rule, Section 40 of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act 1996 places a legal obligation on all public officers to report to the police or to an officer of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) cases where these public officers are given any gratification, or promised or offered some gratification. Where a public officer fails to report the matter, and does not give any reasonable cause of failing to do so, he or she will be guilty of crime.74 Section 3 of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act 1996 defines a ‘public officer’ as ‘any person who is a member of, or holds office in, or is employed in the service of a public body whether such membership, office or employment is permanent or temporary, whole or part-time, paid or unpaid,’75 and that the term public office should be construed accordingly.
Regarding any public officer or citizen ordinarily resident in Zambia, the Anti-Corruption Commission Act 1996 will have effect within as well as outside Zambia, notwithstanding where an offence is committed by such a person.76 Thus, the person can be dealt with in respect of the offence as if it had been committed within Zambia.77 And where any such proceedings would be a bar to subsequent proceedings against the person for the same offence, if the offence had been committed in Zambia, then that aspect of the law will provide an effective bar to further proceedings against such a person under any written law for the time being in force relating to the extradition of persons for the same offence outside Zambia.78 In light of the foregoing, it appears that the ‘single criminality’ test for investigating and prosecuting cases of corruption applies in Zambia.