Zimpapers Logo

Grace Pfumbidzayi

Daniel Nemukuyu Senior Court Reporter
Former Air Zimbabwe Holdings company secretary Grace Pfumbidzayi and ex-chief executive Peter Chikumba have filed heads of argument in their appeal against conviction and sentence, which is set to be heard by the High Court soon.

Pfumbidzayi and Chikumba were jailed seven years each by a Harare magistrate for criminal abuse of duty as public officers.

They were found guilty of corruptly awarding an aircraft insurance tender to Navistar Insurance.

In the heads of argument, separately filed at the High Court by the pair’s respective lawyers, the main issue is that Air Zimbabwe Holdings was a private entity that did not have public characters and that the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower court must be quashed.

Peter Chikumba

Advocate Webster Chinamhora, instructed by Mr Andrew Muvirimi of Muvirimi and Associates, wants Pfumbidzayi acquitted on two grounds.

“Appellant humbly submits that her appeal against both conviction and sentence be allowed and that she be found not guilty and acquitted on the grounds that she was not a ‘public officer’ as defined in Section 169 of the Code.

“Navistar Insurance Brokers (Pvt) Ltd was appointed without going to tender to avert a crisis, as Air Zimbabwe Holdings (Pvt) Ltd was flying aircraft without insurance contrary to the law,” reads the heads of argument.

The lawyers argued that Air Zimbabwe Holdings (Pvt) Limited was a private company formed by shares and registered in terms of the Companies Act.

Chikumba’s lawyers, Advocate Thabani Mpofu and Mr Admire Rubaya, traced the history of the Air Zimbabwe Corporation Act saying Air Zimbabwe Holdings, which employed the two, was not a public entity.

“The affairs of the national airline were statutorily governed in terms of the Air Zimbabwe Corporation Act.

“The Air Zimbabwe Corporation Act was repealed and a successor company took over its affairs in 1998. That successor company is not appellant’s former employer but is a different entity altogether,” reads the papers.

Chikumba’s lawyers argued that both the High Court and Supreme Court in other matters had found that Air Zimbabwe Holdings was not the successor company to Air Zimbabwe Corporation.

“The High Court and subsequently the Supreme Court has found this to be the position in at least three judgments. The employees of the company that employed appellant are by law not public officers.

“The charge was consequently incompetent and so is the conviction. It is nullity and wholly void and appellant’s prospects of success in challenging this invalidity are exceedingly bright,” the lawyers argued.

The lawyers further argued that the trial magistrate wrongly convicted Chikumba basing his ruling on evidence led from witnesses who were not credible.

Chikumba said the court erred by relying on evidence by Pfumbidzayi whose credibility was questionable. It is Chikumba’s contention that the court erred by convicting him basing on evidence that was riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions.

Chikumba argued that the court did not consider his submissions in mitigation resulting in the imposition of a harsh penalty. Charges against Pfumbidzayi and Chikumba arose after an anomaly was discovered by former Air Zimbabwe board chairman Mr Ozias Bvute pertaining to amounts paid between April 2009 and April 2013 to a company called Navistar Insurance Brokers (Private) Limited in respect of aviation insurance premiums.