This
site is designed for Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator versions
4 and above and a screen resolution of at least 800x600
|
|
|
GDC corruption case halted
By
Denis Mzembe - 26-06-2002 |
|
|
A corruption case involving the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) and GDC Haulage in which the hauliers are accused of bribing officers at Customs and Immigration departments and the Road Traffic Directorate to let their trucks pass through toll bridges free, has come to an abrupt halt.
ACB deputy director Alexius Nampota said on Monday that GDC objected to the continuation of the case because a new magistrate took over the case from the former magistrate Frank Kapanda, who was promoted to High Court judge.
Kapanda handed over the case to Blantyre magistrate Chifundo Kachale.
“The objection arose because the defence felt that because of the handover of the case from His Worship Kapanda, His Worship Kachale did not have the opportunity to assess the demeanour of the previous witnesses who had hitherto testified. They, therefore, preferred Judge Kapanda to complete the case,” Nampota said.
He said Kachale ordered the defence lawyers to file an application to the High Court for an order that the file be transferred there.
“We have so far not heard anything from the defence lawyers. If the defence lawyers continue not to take action, we shall insist on the matter proceeding before his worship Kachale in the Blantyre Chief Resident Magistrates Court,” Said Nampota.
He said at the time the case was adjourned on September 12 last year, four witnesses had been examined.
In the case, GDC Haulage is alleged to have evaded paying up to K8.6 million in toll fees between April 1996 and July 1998 by bribing the officers. Seven were arrested and later released on bail in October 1998.
“GDC paid K8.6 million which at the time represented US$220,000 as duty evaded,” Nampota said.
Meanwhile, High Court registrar Healy Potani said at the time Kapanda was promoted to High Court judge he had only heard two witnesses.
“And he is aware of the wrangle where one party says he should continue hearing the case. But it would be irregular for him to continue with the case because he is not exercising magistraterial powers,” said Potani.
He said the defence should follow the procedure by accordingly applying to the High Court, but indicated that the case may not necessarily be heard by Kapanda. |
|
|
|
|
|
