The High Court’s Financial Crimes Division has upheld the continued restriction of funds linked to the sale of Amaryllis Hotel, while setting aside fresh freezing directives issued by the Financial Intelligence Authority (FIA).
Justice Redson Kapindu made the ruling in proceedings involving Yusuf Investments Limited (YIL), which operates Amaryllis Hotel, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and the FIA.
The case follows the controversial sale of the five-star hotel in Blantyre to the Public Service Pension Trust Fund (PSPTF) in 2025, a transaction that has been under investigation by several authorities.
The court found that FIA had a legitimate interest in investigating substantial cash withdrawals from YIL accounts, particularly given the size of the transaction and the involvement of public pension funds.
“The movement of very substantial sums of money in cash… is not something which FIA can reasonably be expected to have simply ignored,” Justice Kapindu said.
However, the judge criticised FIA for issuing fresh freezing directives immediately after a magistrate had refused to renew the ACB’s restriction notices.
The court said FIA should instead have urgently approached the High Court if it wanted the freezing measures reinstated.
“What occurred here, with respect to FIA, is rather troubling,” Justice Kapindu said, noting that FIA imposed fresh directives the day after the magistrate declined to renew the ACB restrictions.
The judge said allowing such a practice would undermine the requirement for judicial oversight by allowing one agency to take over where another agency’s restraint had expired.
“I therefore hold that the proper course for FIA to have taken was to urgently approach the Court to revive the freezing directives,” he said.
As a result, the court set aside FIA’s fresh freezing directives and ordered that FIA should apply to a competent court if it wished to pursue the restraint.
The ruling, however, did not mean that YIL’s funds were immediately released.
Justice Kapindu upheld the ACB’s restriction of the funds, saying the court had been presented with evidence of “very substantial and thus far unexplained cash movements” requiring further investigation.
The judge ruled that the ACB restriction, which had been renewed on an interim basis on July 8, 2026, would remain in force for three months from that date.
He said releasing the funds immediately could create a risk of dissipation and potentially affect future asset recovery proceedings.
Justice Kapindu also warned the investigating agencies that ongoing investigations alone cannot justify indefinite restrictions.
“The words ‘investigations are still ongoing’ cannot work like a magic wand or a master password by which the competent authority may indefinitely unlock another three months of continued restraint,” he said.
He directed the ACB and FIA to demonstrate progress in subsequent applications, saying there must eventually be movement from suspicion to investigation, findings and evidence, and, where warranted, prosecution or asset recovery.
“At some point, the law requires a conclusion to the process, one way or the other,” Justice Kapindu said.
