FORMER Patriotic Front (PF) general secretary Edward Mumbi has disclosed that the currently controversial US$27,000 grabbed from the opposition leader Michael Sata in South Africa was given to him for a deal to concession a mineral-rich piece of land in Luapula Province to a team of foreign business people, According to the Times of Zambia.
Mr Mumbi, who has challenged Mr Sata to deny this fact, has also advised the PF leader to explain to the nation what consultancy services he claimed to have provided for him to be paid this amount of money.
But when contacted, Mr Sata said there was no way he could concession land which was not his and that he owed Zambians no explanation over the US$27,000 since it was his money and not theirs.
“I know those lies are coming from Mr Mumbi but how can I concession land which is not mine?” he asked.
Mr Mumbi said Mr Sata’s deal concerned land stretching from Lukwesa through Mwansabombwe to Chishinga Island which was allegedly promised to these sponsors had he won the 2006 elections.
He said it was wrong for Mr Sata to remain quiet over such a serious matter when Zambians needed his explanation.
“There is this information that Mr Sata promised land between Lukwesa and Mwansabombwe in Luapula Province and an Island called Chishinga.
This land, which Mr Sata promised to give to his donors, had he won the 2006 elections, is rich in minerals.
“If Mr Sata is saying this is a lie, then let him tell the Zambians the truth. I am also challenging him to tell us Zambians what kind of consultancy he provided for him to be given US$27,000,” Mr Mumbi said.
He said Zambians were not asking for too much by urging Mr Sata to explain the source of such a large sum of money which he carried in a foreign country.
He wondered why the same money could not be deposited into Mr Sata’s bank account in Zambia if it was genuinely obtained.
“Mr Sata himself has been to too many platforms preaching the need for morality and he should know that what Zambians are asking for when they tell him to explain the source of the said dollars is the same morality. Why can’t he come out in the open and clear the air so that the matter is put to rest?” he asked.
Zambians, Mr Mumbi said, did not want to be ruled by people with many unanswered questions, hence the need for Mr Sata to explain how he had made declarations on the documents which queried whether a person had once been imprisoned for any criminal offence or not.
He said the investigations Government was carrying out into Mr Sata’s alleged arrest for a criminal offence in the 1960s should not be politicised as it was part of scrutinising people vying for the highest office in the land.
But Mr Sata denied having concessioned the said land and said he would not tell the Zambians the source of the US$27,000 because it was not their money.
“I have never been Lands minister to concession any land. Who and when did I promise to give land to anyone? I can’t promise land for which I have no title.
“Also, what does the nation had to do with my US$27,000. It is my money and not theirs and if the South African authorities could not question me about that money, why should I be made to explain to the Zambians, is it theirs?” Mr Sata asked.