Lusaka businessman, Harry Findlay, on Wednesday walked out of court a free man after paying a K240,000 fine, avoiding imprisonment following his conviction on two immigration-related offences—holding more than one Zambian passport and possessing a forged immigration endorsement. Chief Resident Magistrate Sylvia Munyinya convicted Findlay after ruling that the State had proved both charges beyond reasonable doubt. She imposed a K180,000 fine for the first count and K60,000 for the second, both payable immediately.
In default, Findlay would have served six months and four months’ simple imprisonment, respectively, with the sentences running cumulatively. In her judgment, Magistrate Munyinya observed that Findlay was issued a second Zambian passport in November 2019, valid until 2029, despite already holding one issued in March 2017, valid until 2027. Immigration records revealed no lawful justification for the additional passport.
Findlay argued that he applied for a new passport because his previous one was full and contained valid visas. However, the court found that by the time the second passport was issued, the visas in the older passport had expired, undermining his explanation. “The accused’s argument does not hold water,” Magistrate Munyinya said, adding that evidence demonstrated that Findlay knew he had more than one passport and actively used them, contrary to the law.
Read Full Article on Zambia Monitor
[paywall]
On the second count, the court held that the immigration endorsement in question was fake, noting it “told a lie about itself.” The magistrate said Findlay was in possession of the passport containing the forged stamp and was aware of it, offering no lawful justification for having the falsified endorsement. The court concluded that all elements of the offence under Section 52(4)(e) of the Immigration and Deportation Act were satisfied and convicted him on both counts. In mitigation, Findlay’s wife, Dessislava Findlay, who was part of his defence team, pleaded for leniency, describing him as a first-time offender, a businessman employing many workers, a taxpayer, a family man with dependants, and someone of poor health.
She argued that the offences were regulatory and typically attracted non-custodial sentences. This material, and other digital content on this website, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or in part without prior express permission from ZAMBIA MONITOR.
[/paywall]
