PS denies adultery

Written by on July 29, 2020


FOREIGN Affairs Permanent Secretary, Ronald Simwinga has denied committing adultery with Musamba Mulenga, an investments officer.

This is a matter in which businessman Lombe Okpara, has dragged his wife, Musamba Mulenga, to the Lusaka High Court for dissolution of their eight-year marriage for allegedly engaging in adultery with Simwinga and former Central Province Deputy Permanent Secretary Patrick Mwanawasa.

He has also cited Simwinga and Mwanawasa as first and second co-respondents in the matter.

According to his petition for the dissolution of marriage, Okpara claimed that his wife admitted committing adultery with Simwinga and Mwanawasa.

He further claimed that on November 3, 2018, his wife and Mwanawasa spent time together at a short-term rented duplex apartment situated on Lukanga road in Roma township.

Okpara stated that his wife and Mwanawasa spent about five hours in the said apartment from 17:00 hours to 21:45 hours after which Mwanawasa allegedly complained of pain on his manhood following the alleged sexual encounter.

He also cited unreasonable behaviour among other reasons, claiming that his wife arranged and hosted a party for Simwinga at her sister’s house and convinced him that it was a kind gesture to appreciate Simwinga for the favours that he did for her family.

But in his answer filed in the Lusaka High Court, Simwinga denied committing adultery with Mulenga, stating that he will make Okpara to strictly prove his allegations against him at trial.

He denied ever being invited for a party and said he will state at trial that he had only attended a luncheon at the home of Mulenga’s elder sister, with whom they are good friends.

Simwinga also denied leaving his house keys with Mulenga.

He argued that Okpara had failed to show how he (Sinwinga) and Mulenga allegedly committed adultery in his petition.

“The first co-respondent (Simwinga) objects to the prayers contained in the petition as the petitioner (Okpara) has failed to establish adultery and it will be unjust if the petitioner were to be awarded damages,” Simwinga stated.

“The claim against the first co-respondent before this honourable court should be dismissed for being frivolous and malicious due to the foregoing reasons,” argued Simwinga.

Reader's opinions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Continue reading

Current track