“Mutoto Kafwaya Fired at the Officer”: Simuuwe’s Remarks Trigger Questions and Tension

‘How does he know?’

The reaction on the Zambian Eye Facebook page has been dominated by one question: How does Simuuwe know that Kafwaya opened fire?

One commenter asked: “How does he know? Was he present?”

Another asked whether Simuuwe was at Brian Mundubile’s residence on the night of the operation.

Other reactions went further, suggesting that if Simuuwe has direct knowledge of what happened, he may have information that could be relevant to investigators.

One commenter said the remarks suggested that Simuuwe “must be a witness”, while another asked whether he was at the scene.

There were also comments asking why State agencies had not publicly disclosed the information contained in Simuuwe’s account and whether evidence existed to establish that Kafwaya fired first.

What Government has already said

Simuuwe’s remarks need to be distinguished from the official account already given by the security authorities.

Following the August 14 operation at the Kabulonga residence, authorities said the joint task force encountered gunfire and resistance from people at the property and returned fire. Kafwaya was killed during the exchange.

The authorities’ account therefore establishes the Government’s position that there was an exchange of gunfire.

What Simuuwe’s remarks appear to add is a more specific assertion concerning Kafwaya’s own actions.

That distinction matters because establishing who fired, in what circumstances, and whose bullets caused particular injuries is ultimately an evidential question.

Mundubile has given a different account of the incident, saying armed personnel entered the residence and opened fire, and that Kafwaya was shot in his presence. His account has not independently been verified.

The competing accounts make the investigation particularly important.

Why the remarks have attracted such strong reaction

The timing of Simuuwe’s comments is also significant.

The Government’s latest position, contained in Foreign Affairs Minister Mulambo Haimbe’s response to the European Parliament, is that the circumstances surrounding Kafwaya’s death remain under active investigation by the Zambia Police Service, with independent oversight by the Human Rights Commission.

Government has also said the family was offered an opportunity to participate in the post-mortem examination through legal representation and an independent pathologist.

Against that background, some members of the public are questioning whether political officials should be making definitive statements about disputed facts before investigators and other competent authorities have concluded their work.

One commenter on the ZE page urged people to allow the matter to proceed to court rather than continuing to debate it publicly.

Another suggested that social media records could ultimately become relevant if people who claim knowledge of the incident are called to testify.

Tonse Alliance: ‘He should be reported to police’

The remarks have also drawn a response from the Tonse/Pamodzi Alliance.

Alliance Media Director Brian Mulambo has called for Simuuwe to be reported to the police, arguing that if he has information establishing what happened during the incident, that information should be formally given to investigators.

The position raises a straightforward question: if Simuuwe has information about what happened inside the residence, should that information be treated as political commentary or provided to investigators as part of the evidence?

That is ultimately a matter for the relevant authorities to determine.

The unanswered question

The central issue is not simply whether people agree with Simuuwe.

It is what is the source of his information?

Was he relying on the official account from security agencies?

Was he briefed by people involved in the operation?

Did he obtain information from investigators?

Or was he expressing a political interpretation of events?

Simuuwe has not, in the material reviewed for this report, publicly explained the evidential basis for the specific assertion that Kafwaya opened fire.

That is why the comments have generated such intense reaction.

Several people responding to the ZE Facebook post have repeatedly asked whether Simuuwe was present at the scene or whether he has information from someone who was.

A case where evidence matters

The circumstances surrounding Kafwaya’s death have already generated competing accounts.

The security authorities’ position is that there was gunfire from people at the residence and that officers returned fire.

Mundubile’s account is that security personnel entered the house and opened fire, with Kafwaya being shot in his presence.

Neither account should be treated as finally established simply because it has been repeated publicly.

The question of who fired first, whether Kafwaya fired a weapon, what weapons were discharged and whose ammunition caused the fatal injuries are matters that can potentially be tested through witness testimony, forensic examination, ballistic evidence and other investigative processes.

That is precisely why Government has said the matter remains under investigation.

For now, Simuuwe’s comments have added another layer to a case that already has sharply conflicting accounts — and the public reaction suggests many people want to know what he knows and how he knows it.

Zambian Eye will continue to follow the investigation and the competing accounts surrounding the death of Mutotwe Kafwaya.