The Economic and Financial Crimes Court has handed down a significant legal blow to Dalitso Lungu, the son of late former president Edgar Lungu, by dismissing his application for a stay of execution against the forfeiture of 79 vehicles and 23 properties, collectively valued at over K23 million.

The court ruled that Mr. Lungu and Saloid Traders Limited had failed to demonstrate the exceptional circumstances required to halt the seizure of these assets, which are deemed proceeds of crime.

The comprehensive judgment was delivered by a three-judge panel of the Economic and Financial Crimes Division, comprising Justices Pixie Yangailo, Ian Mabbolobbolo, and Anna Malata.

The court acknowledged that the Director of Public Prosecutions, Gilbert Phiri, had successfully established the case for the non-conviction forfeiture of Mr. Lungu’s properties.

Mr. Lungu had initially sought to stay the execution of the court’s 18 February 2026 forfeiture ruling while he pursued an appeal against the decision.

His application for a stay was submitted on 20 March 2026, relying on provisions of the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act and the Court of Appeal Rules.

However, the bench found no merit in the request, emphasizing that dissatisfaction with a judgment or merely alleging errors was insufficient to justify suspending the forfeiture order.

The judges explicitly stated that Lungu failed to provide "good and convincing reasons" for the court to exercise its discretion in his favor.

Furthermore, the court noted that Mr. Lungu had not shown that he would suffer irreparable or substantial harm if the State proceeded with the recovery process.

Reviewing Lungu’s grounds of appeal, the judges also concluded that they did not indicate a strong likelihood of success, a factor they highlighted as ultimately resting with the Court of Appeal.

In dismissing the application for stay of execution in its entirety, the court reiterated that the State is entitled to "enjoy the fruits of its judgment."

This decision effectively clears the path for government agencies to move forward with the seizure of the vehicles and properties linked to the original forfeiture order.