13. Based on the absence of any case made by Plaintiffs before the Zambian courts, I cannot conclude that there was a finding that Defendants were not immune from jurisdiction in Zambia. Were Plaintiffs to have made a case for a waiver of sovereign immunity, it is my opinion that the Commissioner would be immune because there is no evidence that he engaged in any private act as it related to the MOUs.
14. In the Complaint, Plaintiffs have not made a case that Defendants waived their immunity in Zambia, so I can take no position at this time on Plaintiffs’ arguments. I reserve the right to do so.
15. Upon being retained herein, I caused to be conducted a search of proceedings at the High Court for Zambia Commercial Registry, under cause number 2019/HPC/ARB/0337. Based on that search, I found no evidence that Plaintiffs sought leave to serve ZMDC or the Commissioner outside of Zambia, which is a mandatory requirement to effect service before a Zambian court, and I found no evidence of any service on ZMDC or the Commissioner.