ACB races against time on Amaryllis funds restriction

**By Pemphero Malimba: **

The Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) is racing against time on its three-month restriction window against the use of funds made through the purchase of Amaryllis Hotel.

Public Service Pension Trust Fund (PSPT purchased the hotel.

ACB’s restriction is set to expire on October 7.

Through a September 25, 2026 judgement, High Court Judge Redson Kapindu finalised the granting of ACB’s three-month restriction notice, which the court renewed on an interim basis on July 8, 2026.

The restriction was given to pave the way for the ACB to continue its investigations into the transaction.

This meant that Yusuf Investments Limited (YIL), owners of the hotel, could not use the funds.

ACB Senior Public Relations Officer Jacqueline Ngongonda said the recent ruling granted the bureau relief after a magistrate court’s ruling against renewing its notice.

“The ruling is a relief as it comes after the magistrate court declined to renew the restriction notice on funds implicated in the purchase of Amaryllis Hotel,” Ngongonda said in a written response following the High Court ruling.

She said the bureau would act on the issue.

“The bureau will take appropriate action before the expiry of the 3-month period,” she said.

The expiry of the notice would mean that the company would be at liberty to use the funds, unless it is extended.

In the ruling, Kapindu said the bureau may have to provide convincing justification in subsequent renewal applications before the magistrate court.

He said this was because the investigation the bureau was carrying out had already taken a substantial period of time.

“Some of the cash transactions relied upon as a basis for the continued investigations are said to have occurred in January 2026. The ACB and FIA [Financial Intelligence Authority] have had the benefit of restraint for months now. There is a need to show progress and/or other convincing justification in subsequent renewal applications before the Magistrate,” he said.

According to court documents, YIL argued that the Interim order renewing the Restriction Notices on an interim basis was incompetent and that the court needed to vacate it.