Mupfumira ruling further deferred Prisca Mupfumira

Nyore Madzianike Senior Court Reporter

The ruling on the application by former Cabinet minister Prisca Mupfumira and ex-National Social Security (NSSA) manager Barnabas Matongera for discharge at the close of the State’s case was yesterday further deferred to next week because the magistrate was not available.

Harare regional magistrate Mr Ngoni Nduna is off duty after the death of a close relative.

The ruling was set for March 22.

Mupfumira and Matongera are charged with criminal abuse of office charges after they allegedly fast-tracked the signing of an agreement between the National Social Security Authority (NSSA) and Drawcard Enterprises for the construction of low-income houses in Gweru.

The State conceded that it had failed to prove a case against Matongera, although the court said it was not bound by the concession to acquit him.

Mupfumira, through her lawyer Admire Rubaya, made further submissions saying by conceding that Matongera had no case to answer, the State was now implying Mupfumira allegedly committed the offence alone.

The defence argued that it was unfathomable to allege that Mupfumira committed the alleged offence on her own since she did not sign the agreement in question nor did she witness its signing.

In addition, it was argued, Matongera was not implicating Mupfumira as the person who made him sign the agreement.

Neither of them was the accounting officer of NSSA at the relevant point in time.

Mupfumira, in her submissions, said Liz Chitiga, who was the accounting officer at NSSA, was the one supposed to have been taken to court to explain how the agreement was entered into in the alleged manner and that the State should have obtained evidence from her before seeking to place Mupfumira on her defence.

Mupfumira told the court that the State had failed to explain the contradictions of State witnesses in its response.

Although Mr Whisper Mabhaudhi and Mr Loveit Masuku, prosecuting, acknowledged in their response that evidence from their witnesses was marred with inconsistencies, they said they had managed to establish a case against Mupfumira, which warrants her to be put to her defence.

The State claimed that the inconsistencies in the witness’s testimonies were result of “forgetfulness due to lapse of time” and “lapse of concentration” while testifying.

The State argued that the vital date in respect of the allegations against Mupfumira is when she is alleged to have given the 48-hour ultimatum to NSSA management to conclude an agreement with Metbank through DrawCard Enterprises (Private) Limited for the Muzenya Project.

The prosecution says witness Kurauone Francis Chihota celarly told what transpired at the meeting leading to the alleged ultimatum by the Mapfumire.

“What transpired at the meeting was not the norm with regards to investment projects undertaken by NSSA. Any proposed projects were supposed to be considered by the management investment committee, then referred to the board investment committee and finally to the main board,” said the State.

The State said Mupfumira, as a Cabinet minister, was supposed to give broad and strategic directives to NSSA through the board.

“In the present circumstances she was chairing a meeting consisting of board members, management team and a potential investment partner (Metbank),” said the State.

Responding to Mupfumira’s assertions that the charge was a fabrication by her political enemies for supporting President Mnangagwa at the time he was Vice President, the State said: “Any lack of detail on the part of the witness is naturally explained by forgetfulness due to lapse of time. His evidence was credible and worth believing. Such detail could not have been a figment of fertile imagination on his part.”

In commenting about evidence by Deputy Chief Secretary and the accounting officer responsible for Administration, Finance and Human Resources in the Office of the President and Cabinet, Dr Martin Rushwaya, the State acknowledged that he knew nothing about the Muzenya Project. The State said his evidence was procedural.

You Might Also Like

Comments

Take our Survey

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