fbpx
Connect with us

Corporate Governance

Action SA President and Former Jo’burg Mayor Herman Mashaba Found Wanting In The Public Protector’s Report

Published

on

Brian Kazungu, 21/12/2020

Following a complaint by an anonymous entity to its offices, according to Report No. 21 of 2020/21 – (Anonymous v City of Johannesburg), there were some irregularities in the City of Johannesburg which after its own investigations, the Public Protector confirmed that many of the issues raised were substantive and warranting remedial action.

The report which was issued today highlighted that the complaint centered on irregular staff appointments, irregular salary increases, financial mismanagement and conflict of interest in the City of Johannesburg’s affairs.

It also touched on allegations of irregular staff appointments involving the appointments of the Executive Director of Housing, Group Head of Legal, Group Forensic Investigation Services Executive Head, Chief of Johannesburg Metro Police and the current City Manager.

Among some of the other irregularities which were also investigated by the Public protector according to the same report was the alleged ‘abuse of office’ by Action South Africa President, Herman Mashaba during his tenure as the Mayor for Johannesburg Metropolitan City.

The former Mayor was sucked in for allegations of complicit on the irregular salary increase for the Former Chief of Staff Mr. Michael Beaumont as well as for tenders involving a company belonging to his wife and a conflict of interest on the affairs of Setheo, a company contracted to the City of Johannesburg

His administration was also found wanting for incompetently failing to utilize a R736 million service delivery grant which had to be recalled back to the National Treasury

Part of the findings reads as follows: The former Executive Mayor of the City: Mr Herman Mashaba unlawfully and irregularly entered the procurement space and solicited free services from Lephatsi Financial Services and whether such amounted to a conflict of interests.

The former Executive Mayor of the City: Mr Herman Mashaba allegedly interfered or influenced the City to use funding allocation of youth drug rehabilitation and support programme to fund Field Band Foundation (FBF) which is a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO).

Here-Under Is The Full Report by The Public Protector:

REPORT ON COJ DELIVERED BY PUBLIC PROTECTOR ADV. BUSISIWE MKHWEBANE AND ADV. KHOLEKA GCALEKA DURING A MEDIA BRIEFING HELD IN PRETORIA ON MONDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2020

Anonymous v City of Johannesburg (Report No. 21 of 2020/21)

The PP investigated an anonymous complaint, which covers four distinct themes”

  •  namely irregular staff appointments,
  •  irregular salary increases,
  • financial mismanagement and
  • Conflict of interest.

Allegations of irregular staff appointments involved the appointments of the Executive Director of Housing, Group Head of Legal, Group Forensic Investigation Services Executive Head, Chief of Johannesburg Metro Police and the current City Manager.

Salary increases – Former Chief of Staff Mr Michael Beaumont’s salary was irregularly increased allegedly with the full knowledge and consent of the former Executive Mayor.

Financial mismanagement,

  • On financial mismanagement, the complainant alleged that the City returned nearly R736 million to National Treasury in funds that were allocated as conditional grants for the year ended in 30 June 2017. National Treasury allegedly served the City with a letter of demand in October 2017 to recover this money which was not spent by the City.
  • It was alleged that the City, due to poor performance failed to spend the conditional grants in 2016/17. The money was allegedly meant for provision of basic services to the residents including water and sanitation, roads, housing, electricity and waste amongst others. This was, to the complainant, an indication of non-compliance, mismanagement and poor oversight by the Democratic Alliance-led administration.
  • In addition, the City allegedly appointed KPMG to conduct investigations in various departments including the Revenue Unit in 2016. In 2017 the services of KPMG were allegedly retained to perform analysis of the customer accounts in the City’s database and develop strategies to improve the City’s revenue collection.
  • These were allegedly different assignments which would require different expertise. Whilst the first appointment was made via a panel of forensic service providers, which KPMG belong to, the second allegedly did not fall under the expertise for which the panel was appointed.
  • KPMG was allegedly appointed without advertising the tender as required by the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) and Supply Chain Management regulations. The basis of this appointment was allegedly through unsolicited bid procedures.
  • In terms of conflict of interest, the City allegedly awarded a multimillion tender for forensic investigations to Grant Thornton Capital. A company called Lephatsi Financial Services, which is allegedly owned by the former Executive Mayor’s wife, allegedly owns a 35% stake of Grant Thornton Capital. The former Executive Mayor is alleged to have unlawfully and irregularly solicited free services from Lephatsi Financial Services.
  • The former Executive Mayor is also alleged to have had a breakdown with Setheo Engineering Company (Setheo) appointed by the City due to personal vendetta against them since Setheo is in the same business as CONCO which is a company allegedly associated with the Mayor.
  • On 23 November 2018, the PPS office further received another complaint straight from the directors of Setheo alleging administrative irregularities in the termination of the NEC 3 contract, failure to respond to communication, bad publicity, abuse of power by the former Executive Mayor and maladministration around sub-contractors by City Power and/or the City.
  • Following the lodging of a separate complaint by directors of Setheo, this issue was then separated from this investigation and it is being investigated by the PPs office on its own as a stand-alone matter.
  • It was further alleged that the former Executive Mayor interfered in the funding allocation by the City of a youth drug rehabilitation and support programme to fund a Non-Governmental Organisation known as Field Band Foundation (FBF) which he claims as a personal project.

After analysing the complaint, the following 11 issues were identified for investigation:

  1. Whether the City improperly or irregularly appointed Mr Moses Metileni to the position of Executive Director: Housing, without following due processes.
  2. Whether the City improperly or irregularly appointed Mr Mafoane Mogashoa to the position of Group Head: Legal and Contracts without following due processes.
  3. Whether the City improperly or irregularly appointed Dr Ndivhoniswani Lukhwareni to the position of City Manager without following due processes.
  4. Whether the establishment of Group Forensic Investigation Services (GFIS) and the subsequent appointment of General Shadrack Sibiya as its Executive Head by the City were improper and irregular.
  5. Whether the City improperly or irregularly appointed Mr David Tembe to the position of Chief of Johannesburg Metro Police (JMPD) without following due processes.
  6. Whether the City irregularly increased the Chief of Staff: Mr Michael Beaumont’s salary and further allocated him the vehicle and Very Important Person (VIP) protection services without conducting security risk assessment.
  7. Whether the City returned nearly R736 million to National Treasury that was allocated as conditional grants for the year ended in June 2017, which money was meant for the provision of basic services to the residents of the City including water and sanitation, roads, housing, electricity and waste amongst others and if so, whether this was an indication of non-compliance, mismanagement and poor oversight by the City.
  8. Whether the City improperly or irregularly appointed KPMG to conduct investigations in various departments within the City for clearly different assignments which would require different expertise, without advertising the tender as required by the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) and Supply Chain Management (SCM) regulations.
  9. Whether the former Executive Mayor of the City: Mr Herman Mashaba unlawfully and irregularly entered the procurement space and solicited free services from Lephatsi Financial Services and whether such amounted to a conflict of interests.
  10. Whether the former  Executive Mayor of the City: Mr Herman Mashaba allegedly interfered or influenced the City to use funding allocation of youth drug rehabilitation and support programme to fund Field Band Foundation (FBF) which is a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO).
  11. Whether the Complainant, the City or any other party suffered improper prejudice in the circumstances.

Following a rigorous investigation, the PP have make the following findings:

  1. The City improperly or irregularly appointed Mr Moses Metileni to the position of Executive Director: Housing, without following due processes.
  2. The City improperly or irregularly appointed Mr David Tembe to the position of Chief of Johannesburg Metro Police (JMPD) without following due processes.
  3. The City improperly or irregularly appointed KPMG to conduct investigations in various departments within the City for clearly different assignments which would require different expertise, without advertising the tender as required by the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA) and Supply Chain Management (SCM) regulations.
  4. The former Executive Mayor of the City: Mr Herman Mashaba unlawfully and irregularly entered the procurement space and solicited free services from Lephatsi Financial Services and whether such amounted to a conflict of interests.
  5. The former Executive Mayor of the City: Mr Herman Mashaba allegedly interfered or influenced the City to use funding allocation of youth drug rehabilitation and support programme to fund Field Band Foundation (FBF) which is a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO).
  6. The rest of the allegations are not substantiated.
  7. In the light of the allegation that are substantiated, the Complainant, the City or any other party suffered improper prejudice in the circumstances.

The appropriate remedial action that I am taking in pursuit of section 182(1)(c) of the Constitution is the following:

The City Manager must take appropriate steps to ensure that:

  1. Within sixty working days from the date of this report, disclose all irregular expenditure incurred in connection with irregular appointments of Mr Metileni, Mr Tembe and irregular extension of a contract of KPMG to the Council and Treasury.
  2. Directs the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of CoJ to amend the closing balance of the current financial statements to accordingly include the irregular expenditure in the previous financial statements.
  3. Within sixty working days of the issue of this report; all CoJ’s officials who are involved in the SCM and Recruitment processes, including all the senior management, attend a workshop on the SCM, Recruitment and Selection procedures and processes.
  4. Within thirty working days from the date of this report, present this report to the current Executive Mayor of the City, for disciplinary action to be taken against all current City employees who are responsible for the flouting of Recruitment processes, SCM processes or any other form of maladministration or improper conduct highlighted in this report.

The Speaker of City Council must:

  1. Within sixty working days from the date of this report, ensures that the Council develops a policy regulating the exercise of discretionary power delegated to the Executive Mayor in relation to Grants for Funding or Donations to institutions or organisations which promotes public health, social welfare, art, culture and education within the jurisdiction of the City as contemplated in Section 79(16)(a) of the Transvaal Local Government Ordinance 17 of 1939.
  2. Within sixty working days of the issue of this report; all City councillors attend a workshop on Management of Conflict of Interests and on Policies related to mandatory Disclosure of Conflict of Interests.
  3. Within thirty working days from the date of this report, present this report to the MEC for Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs in the Gauteng province for a decision to address all irregular expenditure incurred as a result of maladministration and improper conduct highlighted in this report.
  4. The CEO of Road Traffic Management Corporation must take appropriate steps to ensure that within sixty working days from the date of this report, engage in the necessary process to nullify the Metropolitan/ Traffic Police Diploma issued to Mr Tembe by JMPD on 30 June 2007 and further disclose or communicate the outcome of the nullification process to the HoD for Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport.

Brian Kazungu is an Author, Poet, Journalist, and Technology Enthusiast whose writing covers issues to do with Business, Travelling, Motivation and Inspiration, Religion, Politics, and Communication among others. https://www.amazon.com/author/briankazungu https://muckrack.com/brian-kazungu http://www.modernghana.com/author/BrianKazungu kazungu.brian@gmail.com @BKazungu-Twitter He has written and published several books covering various aspects of human life including leadership, entrepreneurship, politics, personal development as well as poetry and travel. These books are found on Amazon https://www.amazon.com/author/briankazungu

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Africa

Machaya asserted that Reconstruction Act was constitutional in 2018, is he correct?

Published

on

In November 2018, Mr. Prince Machaya asserted boldly that a law that divests and deprives shareholders and directors of the control and management of a private company was Constitutional.

He stated as follows to the Parliamentary Committee on Mines that was chaired by Hon. Themba Mliswa as follows:

Source: https://news.pindula.co.zw/2018/11/20/parliament-has-no-power-to-probe-hwange-colliery-company-attorney-general/

Below we have a Q&A with Mr. Tinashe Mpasiri, Director of Corporate Literacy at the Justice Under Rule of Law Institute, an initiative jointly powered by the 1873FM radio and the Banking on Africa’s Future Initiative:

Q: Mr. Mpasiri what is the state?

A: It is ironic that Mr. Machaya, the Attorney General (AG) knows and ought to know that in relation to the Reconstruction of State-Indebted Insolvent Companies Act (Recon Act), the word STATE is not defined.

If this is accepted as true and fact, the question that inevitably follows is how can one be indebted to a nullity?

Notwithstanding, the AG who evidently lives on another planet asserts that it can be a legal possibility that a company can be indebted to this self-created creditor called the state.

Just to demonstrate the absurdity implied in the AG’s assertion that: “In the case of companies which are put under reconstruction, the fact that they are indebted to the State does not necessarily make them Government agencies,” the constitution in terms of s69(2) that provides as set out below precludes a creditor in the name of the state from assuming a superior creditor status in relation to a debtor in terms of the doctrine of equality:

“In the determination of civil rights and obligations, every person has a right to a
fair, speedy, and public hearing within a reasonable time before an independent
and impartial court, tribunal, or other forum established by law.”

Consequently, no law can pass the constitutional muster that is based on a principle that makes the state a judge, jury, and executioner in relation to civil rights and obligations.

The AG has a constitutional duty in terms of s114(4)(d) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe: “to promote, protect and uphold the rule of law and to defend the public interest;” and his conduct and attitude in relation to the constitutional validity confirm he not cognizant on the limitations imposed upon him by the constitution.

Q: What is your take on the statement by AG that: “Parliament cannot exercise its powers over a company like Hwange, any power that it would not otherwise have if it is not under an order of reconstruction because it is a privately-controlled company?”

A: Indeed, no company is contemplated and permitted to exist that is defined as state-indebted because the indebtedness of a company does not define its identity. This is like classifying a pregnant woman into another human class. A woman belongs to a universal class of humans and as such should be incapable of belonging to any special class solely on account of pregnancy.

A company is a company by any description and, therefore, the Recon Act creates no company and as such a company under reconstruction is no company at all but is analogous to a company whose control and management are hijacked by an act of state.

This can only happen in a country that does not respect the rule of law.

It is chilling that an AG, an oath-taking public office bearer can surrender to a civilization in which the so-called state can acquire the rights and freedoms of a creditor when it enjoys no standing to be a creditor.

What is astonishing is that this offensive and morally bankrupt Act is administered by the Minister of Justice, Legal, and Parliamentary Affairs who possesses no jurisdictional facts to determine if a private company is indebted or not?

On what legal and constitutional basis would this public office bearer acquire the facts to enable him to determine that a private company is indebted to the so-called state on the one hand and conclude in his mind that the said company is insolvent without the purported debtors being constructively involved in the enterprise of hijacking?

Q: The AG asserted that the company so hijacked using this law as a weapon: “has got shareholders and other people,” what is your take on this statement?

A: The mere fact that the hijacked company has its own shareholders and officials makes it unconstitutional for public power to be used to divest and deprive them of the control and management of their company without following the due process of the law.

Q: The AG further stated: “If there was no order of reconstruction, Parliament cannot play its oversight over Hwange,” what do you make of this statement?

A: The AG is saying because the hijacking of a company does not involve any public funds, the Parliament has no jurisdiction over the creature. This is tantamount to saying that the loot obtained from the use of public power does not legally belong to the government but to the looters.

Q: The AG stated: “The order of reconstruction itself does not make Hwange an institution of Government,” what is your take on this?

A: The whole enterprise of reconstruction is to permit crooked public office bearers to use the government and its coercive power to expropriate private assets without necessarily creating any accountability in the process. In other words, the Administrator, a creature of statute assumes the control and management of the confiscated assets without suffering the statutory burden of reporting to any organ of state other than the Minister who issued the extra judiciary order in relation to a private company whose effect is to create a facade of a company without the properties of a company. The Administrator is not accountable to Parliament yet the basis of placing the company under reconstruction is that the hijacked company is indebted to the fiscus.

Continue Reading

Africa

As Justice Makarau got offended by Mupasiri’s court submissions, justice may be the victim

Published

on

On Thursday, 3 March 2022, Justice Makarau was offended that Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri, the applicant in the unprecedented application to hold President Mnangagwa to account in an honest and transparent manner for his alleged role and knowledge in relation to the facts and circumstances that triggered the use of Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) as a weapon to attack the rights and freedoms of the shareholders of not only SMM Holdings Private Limited but a host of other juristic entities.

The heated exchange between Justice Makarau followed Mr. Mawere, the Applicant in the matter under Case# CCZ 11/22 for the recusal of the Learned Judge on alleged bias in matters that are cogent in the Mupasiri application.

At issue is whether the allegations made by Manikai, who is President Mnangagwa’s close ally and confidant apart from his legal advisor, on 27 March as follows were true and factual but to date, the President has chosen to fully associate himself with Manikai’s predicament as a professional lawyer who independently of President Mnangagwa took an oath to promote and protect the Constitution.

“I am perturbed that my President would openly and brazenly associate himself with a judge who in her judgment stated that she did not owe a duty to her oath by knowingly and intentionally refusing to consider the merits of the dispute that was brought before her on the assumption that she was an independent and impartial mind,” said Mr. Collins Charumbira.

Mr. Charumbira did not have any good words to say about Manikai, who he claims blocked him following an inquiry about the facts that were shared in the FOSMM group to the effect that Manikai is a person of interest in unpacking the facts and circumstances that led to the demise of SMM in 2004 following the use draconian manner in which public power was used to alienate the shareholders of companies that were providing jobs and income to thousands of Zimbabweans.

Manikai arrogantly told Collins to mind his business and never contact him again alleging that he was sent by Mawere to harass him over what he regarded as some “spilled milk.”

Collins said: “I am very encouraged that Mupasiri has taken the search for the truth forward and this dispute has migrated from chat groups to an arena that is provided for in the constitution.

I had no idea what the s167 remedy and I had already surrendered to my comfort after Manikai rebuffed my bona fide attempt to establish how he personally got involved in attacking Mawere, especially having regard to the objective facts that absent Mawere’s financial and moral support, the firm that President Mnangagwa is using to defend himself, DMH, would not be a reality.

Manikai tried to use the attorney to client privilege to avoid addressing my questions regarding his seminal role in prosecuting the reconstruction or destruction measures against SMM.

I am following closely this matter but I am increasingly convinced that President Mnangagwa may be a pawn in a game that Manikai authored for political expediency.”

The President and Manikai were represented by a junior attorney working for DMH in this application.

At the previous hearing, he told Justice Makarau that he had been instructed to oppose the recusal application by both his clients i.e., the President and Manikai.

Although Mupasiri had sought no relief against Manikai, Manikai has opposed his application.

“What I know is that there can be no justice without the truth in it.

What is troubling me is that no lawful would be blind to obligations imposed upon him or her, to tell the truth. When I wrote a letter to Manikai on 8 November 2021, I naively thought he would welcome my gesture by cooperating with the search for justice under the rule of law, but what I have been able to gather is that he behaves like a warlord who believes that he is UNTOUCHABLE.

It is striking that Manikai like Temba Mliswa believes that President Mnangagwa is the law or he is above the law and as such my application is an attack against the person of President Mnangagwa when he triggered and provoked me to be angry.

The more I learned about the SMM matter, the angrier I got but what has disturbed me more is that there are far too many people who excel at pontificating in chat groups without taking any steps to assert the rights that are enshrined and entrenched in the constitution,” said Mr. Mupasiri.

He continued to state as follows in relation to his experience on Thursday when he appeared before Justice Makarau’s case: “When Mawere launched his recusal application, I had taken this matter to be a third party cause and as such, all I needed to do was to focus on my application.

I did not oppose the relief Mawere sought because I genuinely believed that the intervention of the parties with knowledge would be helpful and beneficial to the court in resolving my cause of complaint.

I came to court with this understanding and background including my own curiosity as to what interest if any, would a President have in sticking to Justice Makarau as the only judge who can determine the application by Mawere for leave to intervene in my application.

Justice Makarau opened the hearing by establishing from the litigants in what capacity they were in court.

I told her that I was the main applicant and also that I was a self-actor.

Mr. Mawere was the first one to be asked to make his submissions. He was eloquent and on point. I was impressed by his understanding of the rules of court, his submissions regarding his objection to Justice Makarau’s involvement in any matter that she has already made judicial findings, and his unique ability to connect the dots.”

Mawere was followed by Mr. Gondogwa who appeared on behalf of the Respondents.

This is my first time to appear in court as a self-actor but what happened since Thursday, 25 February 2022 when Justice Makarau gave directions as to how the recusal application would be processed, I was surprised that the lawyers representing the President would proceed to intentionally sabotage the litigation.

The President and Manikai knew that they had to file their answering affidavits by close of business to allow Mawere to respond by close of business on Wednesday.

I was only served the opposing papers on Tuesday afternoon and Mawere was only served the papers on Wednesday morning after protesting to the Presiding Judge.

The explanation that Gondongwa gave that their messenger could not find the address did not make sense but this was meant to frustrate the process.

I was pleasantly surprised that Mawere managed to serve an answering affidavit that dealt with all the allegations made by the Respondent.

Accordingly, I was comforted that the Judge would at the very least reprimand DMH for failing to adhere to her directions but alas she said nothing at all.

I was also a recipient of Mawere’s letter to the Registrar to ask if the Learned Judge could postpone the matter to allow him to still get the 2 days allocated for him to respond.

The Learned Judge took the decision to completely ignore the request.

After Mawere’s brilliant submissions, Mr. Gondongwa on behalf of the Respondents did his best to divert the court’s attention in order for the recusal application to be dismissed, I was then asked by the Learned Judge to indicate whether I wished to say something regarding the recusal application.

The Learned Judge asked me to identify my interest in the dispute. I told her after reading Mawere’s application and his oral submissions, I wanted to zero in on two issues.

The first one was regarding the legality and constitutionality of a reconstruction order that was issued by Gwaradzimba in his capacity as the Administrator of SMM under circumstances that clearly offend the rule of law.

Below is the first paragraph in Justice Makarau in relation to the review application that she capriciously dismissed that was launched by the Second Intervening Party or THZ Holdings Limited (THZH), the company that had a direct and indirect shareholding in Zimre Holdings Limited (ZHL) of about +46%, trying to assert its rights in relation to the recognition of Gwaradzimba as an Administrator of Zimre.

It is clear that Gwaradzimba’s authority over Zimre was recognized by Justice Makarau when he possessed no title to do so. SMM had no ownership nexus with Zimre and yet the Learned Judge recognized the authority I described as akin to a pedestrian’s power and authority in relation to a company.

I was shocked that Justice Makarau contrary to the version given by President Mnangagwa in his opposition to my application that judges like her had determined the SMM reconstruction disputes in an independent and impartial manner, Justice Makarau had recognized and enforced flowing from Gwaradzimba’s purported order that was published in the local press announcing that Zimre, a listed company with other shareholders, was under his control and management.

Astonishingly, Justice Makarau admitted Gwaradzimba pursuant to an order that he authored as a party to the proceedings that should have been limited to parties with bona fide interests in the affairs of Zimre.

Not only did Justice Makarau clandestinely abuse her discretionary powers as a Judge to give the audience to Gwaradzimba, a creature of an act of state, she also gave him an order to control the destiny and fate of Zimre.

Surprisingly, she even had forgotten this travesty of justice that was orchestrated by her inside the court.

This knowledge alone created a real and not some abstract apprehension of bias allowing me to tell her from the bar that she is not fit to preside on the application for leave to intervene if in the part she had illegally given Gwaradzimba rights which no law permitted a judicial manager to possess.

It shocked me that according to Makarau, reconstruction was akin to liquidation when this is false and was solely intended to justify the theft of private assets using crooked judges as instruments or weapons to undermine the rule of law.”

The link to the notice referred to in Justice Makarau’s judgment is provided here: https://online.flipbuilder.com/mmawere/sdci/.

Below is a link to the full Zimre judgment: https://online.flipbuilder.com/mmawere/sdci/

Either the President knowingly and intentionally orchestrated the corporate coup and used his power and influence to procure fatally defective judgments by judges like Makarau or his power and authority were abused without his knowledge.

Mupasiri has given President Mnangagwa and Manikai to come clean and lift the lid that has been put by Manikai’s over the President’s head but it would appear that both persons do not believe that they are accountable to the constitution.

[0:27 pm, 05/03/2022] mdmawere1: Holding the powerful accountable
Cover up – hide – it is not just about SMM but about a broken system that will never get better when the sense of morality has shifted to condoning despicable acts.

Mr. Lonely Jeketera, a member of FOSMM and JUROL, who is a Business Consultant specializing in Company Registrations, Tax Advisory, and Human Capital Practice stated as follows: “I attended the recusal hearing before Justice Makarau and I was encouraged by the boldness of Mr. Mupasiri and his eloquence in asserting that the recusal application is key to the just and proper determination of his application that is pending before the court.

I had no idea that the judgments that President Mnangagwa relied upon included Justice Makarau’s judgments that she openly admitted were not determined on the facts placed before her court but on other considerations.

I have always wondered how THZH lost its shareholding in Zimre but now I can connect the dots as it is clear that Gwaradzimba used Justice Makarau as his weapon to create a nexus that did not exist to substitute shareholder rights with a creature of statute whose relationship with Zimre was recognized and enforced by the Court disregarding the constitutional rights of the parties involved.”

Mr. Tinashe Mpasiri, a director of TAP Building Products Limited (TAP), and a member of both FOSMM and JUROL had this to say:

“I have privilege as a person who corporate and financial knowledge to know that RECONSTRUCTION is not akin to LIQUIDATION as incorrectly asserted by Justice Makarau in her Zimre judgment.

Astonishingly, Justice Makarau is not the only one whose literacy on the legal and constitutional basis in which liquidation takes place and the key distinguishing features of extrajudicial self-help schemes like Reconstruction with liquidation or receivership, as even the Attorney General, Mr. Prince Machaya holds the same views as follows: https://www.herald.co.zw/hands-off-hwange-parly-told/.

It is striking that we have encountered the level of gross illiteracy in Zambia wherein a crooked judge called Kajimanga J (as he was known in 2006) held the same view that reconstruction was akin to receivership and as such he granted a judgment tainted by fraud to his court and fraud he assisted inside his court.

The judgment was used by Gwaradzimba and Manikai to steal about $1 million in Zambia.

When I spoke to Gwaradzimba recently, he like President Mnangagwa sought refuge in the decisions of courts that have been used as vehicles to commit fraud with impunity.

I had no knowledge of how deeply rooted corruption is under the watch of President Mnangagwa until I read his sworn statements in opposition to the litigations pursuant to the Mupasiri application.

As a director of TAP, I am tired of negotiating the end of corruption when the 2013 Constitution is instructive that I have an obligation to lift my voice against judges who abuse the trust bestowed on them by law.

I also have a duty to step forward so that the promise of equal protection before the law and the reality that each person has a right to benefit from the equal protection of the law.

I got the distinct sense from Gwaradzimba that he thinks that the limitations imposed by the Constitution do not apply to him and his political Godfather.

Manikai is bound by the same rules that others are duty bound to follow. It is not in dispute that DMH using the Reconstruction Act as a weapon, instructed a Zambian law firm, Mulenga, Mundashi Legal Partners (MMLP), as a corrupt bridge prosecuted a fraudulent claim that TAP was an associate and is doing, obtained a fraudulent judgment that was used to justify the undisputed payment of $127,346.10 by TAP to MMLP when there existed no legal causa for this unjust enrichment.

The Court has not been furnished with all the pertinent facts to determine who was in and out of this orchestrated state capture enterprise in Zimbabwe.

An incriminating narrative has been made by Manikai, a practicing attorney, that all the judges that handled SMM’s reconstruction matters were captured or behaved like robots.

Manikai possesses all the records and it is now common cause that President Mnangagwa who has admitted for the first time that he was fully briefed on the SMM heist and yet he seems to have the protection of the court in keeping mum on what is known to him and disclosing the who is who in the value chains that led to the demise of SMM and other enterprises.

In Zambia, Manikai did not follow the rules but he is not subject to Zambian laws although the crimes against TAP were committed within the borders of the country.

A big lie that Mawere had externalized funds and went to exile with the alleged loot was solely a smokescreen to steal with the knowledge of Zimbabwe’s first citizen, President Mnangagwa.

As an active citizen, I was fortified to also step forward and approach the Court on behalf of TAP and my personal behalf to seek to hold Manikai accountable for the invasion of Zambian jurisdictional space, attack the courts of Zambia, and finally obtain a judgment tainted by fraud.

The fraudulent judgment was used to siphon funds from TAP. President Mnangagwa under oath is not ashamed to use a law that poses so gave risk to the integrity of his administration yet pretends to be the champion of anti-corruption initiatives in Zimbabwe.

It is the blatant attempt to defend the indefensible that shakes my sense of knowing what is right or wrong. I am no longer afraid to call Manikai out for who he is. There are far too many people who are gullible enough to believe that reconstruction was triggered by SMM’s alleged state-indebtedness when in truth and fact the people who claim to be servant leaders are the authors of a vicious attack on the rule of law.

The discourse that should follow the tone and language adopted by President Mnangagwa is scary to me as it suggests that the whole system of governance has irreparably broken down and I am not prepared to go down and sink with these people.

As I listened attentively to the court submissions in the recusal hearing, I could not help but reflect on the meaning of a President who took an oath to protect and uphold the rule of law intentionally seeking to protect Manikai’s actions from public scrutiny.

This to me is a red flag that it will be impossible to unearth and the most unlikely person to seek to conceal the truth from the Court is my President who should suffer no personal prejudice if the truth is openly disclosed he state of knowledge and involvement in the saga.

The refusal and failure by the President not to distance himself from Manikai.

To the extent that the SMM problem just gives us a glimpse of what really takes place in the corridors of public power, this chilling evidence is a pointer to a larger governance national challenge that speaks to a new morality index that violating norms is fine and openly defying tradition, the constitution is perfectly okay and more significantly that the justice system is now an enabler to allow the corrupt to get away with it.

I am concerned that there will never be accountability and transparency if the evidence is constructively placed beyond the ears of the courts as seems to be the case in this matter.

It was clear from the demeanor of Justice Makarau that her court is paralyzed and it is part of a project that involves a conspiracy of many actors in the chain to prevent any investigation from being instituted by President Mnangagwa or by the courts to ensure that the Mupasiri dispute is determined on its merits.”

Continue Reading

Africa

MR. TICHAONA MUPASIRI INDUCTED INTO BOAF – 10,000 POINTS HALL OF FAME

Published

on

The 1873 Network in collaboration with the Africa Heritage Society (AHS) is pleased to announce that Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri (TM), has been inducted into the Banking on Africa’s Future (BOAF) – 10,000 Points of Light (POL) for his outstanding contribution to the building of an open, accountable, and transparent constitutional order in Zimbabwe.

Mr. Jagjit Singh, the Director of the BOAF – 10,000 POL initiative said: “I am pleased to have a person of courage and conviction like Mr. Mupasiri into our community of shapers of Africa that we are all yearning for.

The reality in many African states is that public trust has eroded drastically in the post-colonial era yet there exists very few people prepared to take any step forward to hold people in public offices to account for their conduct in government.

The fact that there exists no shared understanding of what good governance is and is not, compels all of us to take notice of the role that individuals like Mr. Mupasiri play in shaping and defining a new personality of Africa that remains elusive.

I am particularly encouraged that a new consciousness is developing in countries like Zimbabwe that adds value to our collective search for the kind of state craftsmanship that is value-centric and servant orientated.”

Mr. Frederick Koomson, Director of the Public Engagement initiative of JUROL said: “Justice and truth are friends yet rarely do we encounter public office bearers who are willing and prepared to put the public in their confidence in the exercise of their duties.

The quest for justice is our duty as citizens and we are all enjoined to promote, protect and uphold the rule of law.

I am excited that the foundation that we have already laid in the building a critical mass of people who are prepared to step forward and be the face of change that is missing will augur well for the promising future of Africa.”

Mr. Mupasiri said: “I am excited to be one of the lights in Africa and to be recognized for doing that which the constitution of my country expects me to do.

It is true that my application before the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe has given visibility to the urgency and need for citizens to trade fear for active citizenship.

I hope this induction will help inspire others to use the available vehicles to test whether the promise entrenched in the Constitution that no one is above the law is alive and well.

I would rather die on my feet standing for what I believe in than on my knees begging for the rights and freedoms that are part of the constitutional promise.

Ms. Janice Greaver said: “When FOSMM launched an application to compel President Ramaphosa to take the necessary steps to ensure that the precedent set to recognize and enforce rights created by an act of state in Zimbabwe will never happen, I had no idea that this culture of using the courts to determine if the public office bearers are alive to their duties and promises would spread to Zimbabwe so fast.

Welcome, Mr. Mupasiri to the community of forward-leaning individuals.”

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 iniAfrica. an African narrative about ‘The Africa I want‘