FORMER Public Service Labour and Social Welfare minister Prisca Mupfumira cannot be held accountable for what the National Social Security Authority (Nssa) board did, the court has ruled.
This comes as Mupfumira stands accused of exerting pressure on Nssa management to enter into a housing project while flouting tender prejudicing it of US$6,5 million.
Mupfumira is also accused of acting contrary to her duties by allegedly directing Nssa to engage in the Muzenya off take housing project in Gweru which resulted in an agreement with a company called Drawcard Enterprises without following tender process.
Mupfumira was jointly charged with a director at Nssa, Barnabas Matongera who was acquitted on allegations of criminal abuse of office as a public officer after they applied for discharge at the close of the State’s case.
Matongera was accused of signing the housing project agreement with Drawcard without the Nssa board’s approval and having not followed the tender process.
Represented by Admire Rubaya, Mupfumira called for all the allegations to fall saying it was not her duty to seek board approval for the project and that there was no evidence of the alleged instructions to Nssa.
Yesterday regional magistrate Ngoni Nduna cleared Matongera of all the allegations and further ruled that Mupfumira cannot be held accountable for what the board did but she should still explain how Drawcard Enterprises came into the picture.
“What is clear is that there are two facets to the charges; failure to go through tender and the hand picking of Drawcard Pvt Ltd which forms the basis of this charge. It is these areas which the State must have established prima facie case against both accused persons.
“What is clear is that it was the role of the board to subject the Muzenya project to tender procedures. First and second accused were not members of the Nssa board at any given time. They never sat in any board meetings where decisions were made. There was no evidence that they influenced the decision of the board during its meetings,” the court ruled.
The court said the signing of the agreement by Matongera was also a board resolution which he cannot be held accountable for.
The court further said the same applied to Mupfumira who cannot be held accountable for tender processes which were not followed.
Further, the court, while assessing the witnesses’ evidence, pointed to the inconsistency between the key witnesses Kurauone Chihota and Memory Mukondomi on the issue of the deadlines and that they both said besides their word, there was no other evidence to support their claims.
“Accused 2 (Matongera) does not feature in any of the related activities save to append his signature to a process prosecuted by the substantive general manager who was briefly out of the country.
“The court would return the same finding on the part of accused 1 (Mupfumira). She cannot be held responsible for board resolutions passed during her absence. It is…Vela who announced to the board that agreements must be entered into quickly. It was in his presence that the board for the second time passed a resolution which took out the off take projects from the purview Praz regulations. This part of the allegations in view of the evidence cannot find any liability against accused 1,” the court said.
The court however, said she should explain the coming of Drawcard as witnesses’ evidence suggests that she participated in the picking of the firm.
“The evidence of State witness at its best suggests that the accused participated in events that led to the hand picking of Drawcard Enterprises. In the absence of her evidence, that clearly would amount to a case,” the magistrate said.
