Declaration of Judge Chantal Ramazani Wazuri

I,Judge Chantal Ramazani Wazuri, do hereby make the following declaration. All statements, to the best
of my knowledge, are true and correct.

1. My name is Chantal Ramazani Wazuri. I am the presiding judge of the Lubumbashi/Kalamondo

District Civil Court. I was appointed to this position by Presidential Decree dated March 1, 2016.

2. I received my law degree in public domestic law from the University of Kinshasa in Kinshasa,
Democratic Republic of Congo in 1994.

3. In 1996 I was appointed a judge and assigned to the Kalamu Civil Public Prosecutor's Office as an
assistant prosecutor where I served from 1996 to 2009. From 2009 until 2010 I served as a judge
in the Gombe civil public prosecutor's office. From February 8, 2010 until 2016 I served at the
Gombe civil court in Kinshasa and from March 1, 2016 until the present I served as presiding
judge of the District Civil Court in Lubumbashi/Kalamondo. I am technically still the presiding
judge since I have not resigned but I am now living in exile as a result of the facts arising from
the case described below.

4. In my role as presiding judge I was familiar with criminal and civil cases. I played a role in
resolving numerous day-to-day disputes between parties. In this role, I was close to the citizens
of Lubumbashi and handled many motions for settlement.

5. On June 10, 2016 a Greek citizen named Emmanouil Alexandros Stoupis commenced a legal
action against Moise Katumbi Chapwe. In that action the plaintiff, Mr. Stoupis, alleged that the
defendant, Mr. Katumbi, forged certain sale contracts and title deeds and used those forged
documents to sell property that belonged to Mr. Stoupis. The underlying sale document in the
file was dated September 1, 1998.

6. From the very beginning this case became highly politicized:

a. Normally, a case that is fact based, such as this one, is first introduced in the parquet
where the facts are developed methodically and the conclusion of the prosecutor, along
with a complete case file, is presented to the District Civil Court. The District Civil Court
then reviews the evidence and the recommendation of the prosecutor and makes an
independent decision. It is possible to submit a case directly to the District Civil Court
without passing through the parquet but this is only done where the plaintiff believes
the facts are beyond dispute and there is no risk of exceptions being raised. In the
Katumbi case, there were many irregularities which I will note below. The file was
virtually empty of any document supporting the plaintiffs claim. Under normal
circumstances, the case would have no chance of succeeding at the District Civil Court
level based on the file submitted.
b. Also, the case was set for hearing on June 20, 10 days after the case was initially filed.
The speed of Congolese justice is not so quick. Since the case was filed directly to the
District Civil Court, the judges would need time to check the facts, go to the site, check
 the land register and interview various witnesses. It is patently ludicrous to think this
could have been done in 10 days. This case should never have been heard until the facts
had been established by the court. It is not unreasonable to think that at a minimum this
could have taken 4-6 months at the very least.
c. The file in the case contained only one bit of probative evidence, a sale document dated
September 1, 1998. The judges of the District Civil Court, including me the Presiding
J udge, all noted amongst ourselves that plaintiffs benefit from a three year statute of
limitations under Congolese law (see article 24 of the Congolese Penal Code, Book 1).
J ust as relevant, this case was a civil and penal matter. The rendering of the verdict
would not only have awarded the plaintiff money but would have convicted Mr.
Katumbi of a crime. Under Congolese law, the statute of limitations for such criminal
matters is also three years. Not only the civil action but the criminal action was also
barred by the statute of limitations. The document being presented as the forgery was
dated September 1, 1998, almost 15 years after the expiry of the civil and criminal
statute of limitations. On these grounds alone, this case should not have been heard
and the case would have been dismissed had the authorities allowed us to do our jobs
and conduct the proper investigation.
d. The defendant, Moise Katumbi Chapwe, was never properly served notice of the
complaint. The court was informed that when the bailiffs went to his house to serve the
complaint, the bailiffs were informed he was abroad. Upon talking to Mr. Katumbi's
lawyers, we learned he was overseas seeking medical attention with the approval of the
DRC Attorney General. The case should have been delayed to allow Mr. Katumbi to
defend himself(see articles 71 and 74 of the Congolese Penal Code, Book 1).
e. This was a fraud case where the plaintiff alleged that the defendant forged title
documents transferring land that allegedly belonged to the plaintiff. While we were not
given time to check the facts, we, as judges, could read the file presented to us. The
allegedly forged document was remarkably not in the name of Moise Katumbi Chapwe.
It was in the name of others. We all wondered how a case could be brought against Mr.
Katumbi if his name was not on the allegedly forged document.
f. The above objections were raised by defendant's lawyer in the hearing on June 20,
however, we were not allowed to consider any of them.

7. During the week preceding the hearing on June 20, 2016, I was approached by Ambroise
Kamukuny who was chairman of the Lubumbashi Bar Association. Mr. Kamukuny was also the
lawyer of the plaintiff, Mr. Stoupis. In this capacity it was not appropriate for him to make this
ex parte contact with the Presiding Judge of the court hearing his client's case without opposing
counsel present. I also knew Mr. Kamukuny to be the personal lawyer of Mr. Kalev Mutond, the
Administrator of the National Intelligence Agency (Agence Nationale de Resignement). Mr.
Kamukuny made clear that this case was to be disposed of quickly and Mr. Katumbi convicted.
When I raised the obvious exceptions, he responded by telling me that this case was of utmost
importance to Kalev Mutond and President Joseph Kabila Katende. Kamukuny made clear that
no verdict other than guilty would be tolerated. I received numerous telephone calls leading up
to the hearing on June 20th regarding this case from Kamukany as well as Mr. Paulin Ilunga
Tanda, the Presiding Judge of the Lubumbashi Court of Appeals and my superior. Mr. Ilunga also
 threatened me and my fellow judges telling me that if we did not render a guilty verdict I
personally would be disbarred and imprisoned. In addition, I received a call from Mr. Kalev
M utond of the ANR. He told me that this case was "sensitive" and very important to him but
also to President Kabila who would fly from Kinshasa on June 20 to be in Lubumbashi to await
the verdict.

8. In the DRC, the ANR has the reputation of being a ruthless protector of the regime. I had heard
of people being tortured by the ANR and even killed. After receiving the threats referred to
above, I feared for my career, my physical being and my life. Given the charged political
environment, it was clear to me that one way or another, Mr. Katumbi would be found guilty.
The fact that President Kabila was coming to Lubumbashi for the hearing frightened me more
than anything else in my life. Under the Kabila regime, there was no respect for human rights
from the government.

9. On the day of the hearing, I arrived at the court before 8am. I was contacted by Judge Ilunga of
the Court of Appeals who threatened yet again that I must dismiss any objections raised by the
defendant and decide in favor of the plaintiff. Mr. Ilunga, sensing my unease, said he
understood my predicament but that this was a political case brought to keep Katumbi from
running for president. He said it was not worth it for me to object. He made clear the obvious,
that the wrong verdict could cost me at a minimum my freedom and maybe my life.

10. During the hearing itself on June 20, I received a phone call from Mr. Ilunga, the Presiding Judge
of the Lubumbashi Court of Appeals. He called to tell me that President Kabila had arrived in
Lubumbashi and was awaiting the rendering of the verdict convicting Mr. Katumbi. Therefore,
according to Mr. Ilunga, it was my duty to take the case under consideration, i.e, not dismiss it
based upon the exceptions, and convict Mr. Katumbi.

11. My fellow judges and I were in a state of near panic. We understood our duty to uphold the law
but felt that we had no choice but to convict Mr. Katumbi. This conviction was a clear violation
of Congolese law but we were not given a choice.

12. The evening of June 215t was very difficult for me and my colleagues. The threats were nonstop.
We had heard on the news that the conviction had already been rendered, even though that
was not in fact the case. In the end, I was forced to sign the conviction order under threat of
disbarment and conviction for 10 years of imprisonment even though there was no law
supporting any such possible conviction. The conviction was handed down officially on June 22.

13. Under Congolese law, any defendant convicted in absentia has the right to defend himself in a
process called "Opposition" (see articles 74, 88 and 89 of the Congolese Penal Code, Book 1).
Within a few days after the conviction of Mr. Katumbi, Mr. Katumbi's lawyer filed Mr. Katumbi's
Opposition request after the conviction and requested a date of September 5, 2016 for the
hearing. The reasoning was to allow Mr. Katumbi to seek medical assistance and prepare fully
for his defense.
14. Messrs. Ilunga and Kalev both repeatedly contacted me after the submission of the Opposition
request and said that September 5 was unacceptable. They demanded the hearing be set for
J uly 18, 2016. They followed up their initial requests with the same sorts of treats I had received
earlier. Based upon the threats, I scheduled the Opposition hearing for July 25, 2016.

15. Mr. Katumbi then submitted a complaint to the Supreme Court of the DRC alleging that the
actions against him in Lubumbashi were suspect; that the courts in Lubumbashi lacked
i mpartiality and denied him his rights. The Supreme Court acknowledged the submission and
declared that it would take the case under advisement. This should have stopped all
proceedings in Lubumbashi until the proceedings at the Supreme Court were definitively
resolved (see article 60 of law number 13/011 of 11 April 2013 regarding the functioning and
competence of the jurisdictions of the judiciary). Based upon continuing threats from Mr. Ilunga
and Mr. Kalev, I rejected the Supreme Court actions. This was in direct violation of DRC law and
could have gotten me disbarred under normal times.

16. Prior to the July 21 hearing, Mr. Ilunga provided to us a fully drafted decree convicting Katumbi,
fining him US$1 million in principal and interest and convicting him to three years in prison
along with an order for his immediate arrest upon touching down on Congolese soil. He made
clear this was the conviction decree that was to be used.

17. On July 25, 2016, the hearing of Mr. Katumbi's opposition was held. Despite the presentation of
the Congolese Supreme Court's acceptance of the case concerning Mr. Katumbi's claim of
suspicion, the Lubumbashi courts, the hearing was commenced but suspended after 5 minutes.
M r. Katumbi was then convicted based upon the condemnation decree imposed upon us by the
first President of the Court of Appeals, Mr. Paulin Ilunga Tanda. As an example of Mr. Ilunga's
haste and carelessness in the pursuit to convict Katiumbi, I point to the condemnation decree
provided to us by Ilunga. The Court of Appeals, where Ilunga presided, uses the closing
language "as decreed and pronounced". The District Civil Court uses the language "as judged
and pronounced." Clearly, Ilunga had used his own model and not bothered to change it for the
different court.

18. On July 25, 2016, I sent a letter to the DRC Minister of Human Rights denouncing the pressure
brought about by Messrs. Kalev, Kamukuny, Ilunga and President Kabila.

19. My fellow judges on this hearing were all terribly concerned about the manner in which the
process was presented and how they were forced to a decision. All of us felt forced to sign the
condemnation decree or face severe personal consequences. I, as well as the other members of
m y panel, received threats constantly from the authorities as set forth herein.

20. I had convicted an innocent man twice. A man that I did not know personally, but knew of. I
could no longer live with the consequences. For me this was a question of conscience. I decided
to flee the DRC, seek refuge in France and get my family out of Kinshasa as quickly as possible
because of all of the threats I was receiving including death threats including threats from the
 sister of President Kabila, Jaynet. I have been told by friends in the Kabila administration that I
am not safe in Europe and must exercise extreme care because they are looking for me.

21. I did not seek to become a martyr but my country and the Congolese people cannot continue to
live under this corrupt rule where there is no regard for human rights and the rule of law, the
cornerstones of any government looking out for the benefit of its people.

Thank you for your time and consideration. The foregoing is, to the best of my recollection, an account
of the events leading up to the unlawful conviction of Moise Katumbi Chapwe and my ensuing flight to
seek refuge in Europe.

Chantal Ramazani Wazuri

Presiding Judge
District Civil Court, bumabshi/Kamalaondo District

le soussigne Me
1 the undersigned Antoine BAILLY
signature de/of NIA
e
notaire a Paris, certifie matriellement la
notaire in Paris, certify t 1
lig..161 RAVdtq AO i VAU1
apposee sur le present d ur'ti . nt. 4
,:pposed on the present document.
Cette certification ne cornpgrte aucune verification
This certification doesn't contain,any verification
de l'exactitude des faits et actes mentionnes
of the accuracy of, facts mentionned
dans le present document. ,---1SLYCA]
in the present document. VPNI-
NOTAIRESASSOCIES
DUNE SCP

'lie La Boetie