Zimpapers Logo

Yeukai Karengezeka Court Correspondent

The trial of Exclusive Projects (Pvt ) Ltd director, Takudzwa Martin Munyawarara who is facing allegations of defrauding a client of US$48 000 in a botched mobile toilets supply deal could not continue today due to the absence of his lawyer.

Munyawarara is facing fraud and money laundering charges and is pleading not guilty before Harare magistrate Mrs Munashe Chibanda.

His lawyer Msindo Hungwe was absent as he was attending to another case at the High Court hence the matter was postponed to March 13.

It is the State’s case that sometime in May, the complainant Mandy Mvukwe decided to venture into the business of providing mobile toilets for hire at various events.

The court heard that Mvukwe engaged Munyawarara, who claimed to have the capacity to import mobile toilets from China at US$300 each.

It is alleged that the two parties agreed, and Munyawarara promised to facilitate and import 160 mobile toilets from China to Zimbabwe, at a cost of US$300 each, including duty.

The total amount of all the services came to US$48 000.

On June 25, Munyawarara was handed over US$48 000 and promised to supply the mobile toilets by the end of July, but after the time lapsed he started giving excuses leading Mvukwe to make a police report.

On the second count, Munyawarara allegedly committed the offence of fraud amounting to US$48 000 through unlawful activity knowing that it is the proceeds of crime.

The court heard that Munyawarara disguised the illicit deal by unlawfully using the ill-gotten funds to pay his outstanding monthly rentals at Number 26, Ridgeway North, Highlands, Harare.

Munyawarara further paid fees for his children and his medical bills using the ill-gotten funds, thereby committing the offence of money laundering.

In refuting the allegations Munyawarara is arguing that charges laid against him are designed to conceal the real nature of the transaction that took place between them.

He says the US$48 000 transaction was meant to facilitate the complainant’s payments for goods and services in China from locally sourced funds while circumventing Exchange Control Regulations and approval in violation of the approval Exchange Control Act.

He also argues that the matter was civil as it arises emanating from a commercial contractual transaction hence a criminal court should not be abused.