Jane Mutasa’s case dismissed with costs

Daniel Nemukuyu Senior Court Reporter—
The Supreme Court yesterday struck off the roll the case in which former Telecel Zimbabwe board chairperson Dr Jane Mutasa was challenging her suspension from the mobile operator’s board of directors. Justice Elizabeth Gwaunza, sitting with Justices Susan Mavangira and Antonia Guvava as an Appeals Court, yesterday ruled that the appeal by Dr Mutasa was defective.

“There is no appeal before us. The relief sought is defective in a number of respects and the matter is therefore struck off the roll with costs,” ruled the judge.

Advocate Richard Fitsches, instructed by Mr Isaiah Mureriwa of Scanlen and Holderness, acted for Telecel International and Telecel Zimbabwe while Advocate Ray Goba represented Dr Mutasa.

Dr Mutasa wanted the court to nullify a meeting held by Telecel Zimbabwe directors on March 19, 2010 in London, which resolved to suspend her and withdraw her benefits, arguing that the resolution was unlawful as the meeting did not have a quorum.

She also wanted all orders given to Telecel Zimbabwe and Empowerment Corporation (Pvt) Ltd on the same date nullified.

Last year, Dr Mutasa suffered a first blow when High Court judge Justice Nicholas Mathonsi threw out her application, saying it was brought to a wrong court. The High Court did not deal with the merits of the case, but simply dismissed it on the issue of wrong procedure.

Justice Mathonsi said Dr Mutasa failed to advance a meaningful argument to justify the route she took, which was contrary to covenants governing the relationship between the parties.

At the meeting of the board of directors in London, a resolution was adopted suspending Dr Mutasa from the position of chairperson and director.

It was also agreed that her benefits be withdrawn.

Telecel International has 60 percent stake in the country’s second largest mobile service provide, while Empowerment Corporation chairs the board.

Dr Mutasa was suspended as chairperson following her arrest on allegations she was involved in a $1,7 million fraud.

The Prosecutor-General’s Office declined to prosecute Dr Mutasa, arguing that there was no substantial evidence incriminating her.

But the Supreme Court earlier this year ruled that the Prosecutor-General’s Office should issue a certificate for the private prosecution of Dr Mutasa.

The PG’s office is now challenging the Supreme Court ruling at the Constitutional Court, saying the superior court should not be allowed to interfere in its (PG’s) constitutional mandate by compelling it to issue a certificate for the private prosecution of Mutasa.

Initially, Mr James Makamba, a shareholder in Empowerment Corporation, chaired the board.

His right, however, fell away after he was arrested and remanded in custody for a long period, prompting the board to appoint Dr Mutasa in an acting capacity.

Dr Mutasa became substantive board chairperson when Mr Makamba skipped the country.

You Might Also Like

Comments

Take our Survey

We value your opinion! Take a moment to complete our survey