By A Correspondent| The widely circulated corruption case against former Public Service Minister Prisca Mupfumira has collapsed after a deputy chief magistrate Ngoni Nduna found her not guilty of criminal abuse of duty as a public officer stating that the actual people who failed in their duty as public officers were actually made witnesses against her.
Mupfumira was accused of acting contrary to her duties by directing NSSA to engage in the Muzenya off take housing project in Gweru which resulted in a company called Drawcard Enterprises entering into an agreement with NSSA without following tender process.
The State alleged that she handpicked the company and pressurised the Nssa board into entering into an agreement with them, which was against the law and in violation of tender processes.
She was jointly charged with a director at NSSA Barnabas Matongera who was discharged at the close of the State’s case.
During her defence case on Friday as she was being led in evidence by her lawyer,Admire Rubaya, Senator Mupfumira said she was a victim of circumstances, describing the allegations as politically motivated, driven by political adversaries who accused her of supporting President Emmerson Mnangagwa who was then Vice-President.
She denied bringing Drawcard into the picture, stating that it was the responsibility of the nssa board to come up with such procurement decisions. She said she was never part of the board and never sat on it and her version found favour with the court.
“Accused’s version that she never participated in the identification of Drawcard sounds highly probable. Her cry that she may have been a mere victim is not far-fetched. The court comes to this conclusion because there is all the evidence, in black and white, that NSSA board proceeded on its own resolution in the execution of the Mzenya Project, but the state persisted with her prosecution,” the magistrate said.
The Court said the ex-minister cannot be faulted that the project in issue was not taken to tender as this was not her responsibility adding that it is preposterous to think she did that.
The Court said the people who might have abused their duty were the ones who were made witnesses.
“Clearly where one in these circumstances would want the court to believe that accused is responsible from the deviation from PRAZ provisions and that she compelled NSSA to engage Drawcard in the absence of minutes of meetings where accused is recorded as exerting herself towards engagements of Drawcard would be preposterous to say the least.
“It is clear PRAZ regulations were ousted by the resolution of 30 June 2017 from application on Offtake Housing Projects and the identification and engagement of a developer. The only conclusion to be arived at is that NSSA did not go to tender because they resolved not to do so.
“Accused was not part of the deliberations where that resolution was arived at. If ever PRAZ applied to the projects, it is the Legal Advisors in NSSA who should be held liable for not properly advising the board on legal issues. They let the board subvert a statutory provision. And persons who could have erred, in the face of clear evidence, they were lined as witnesses against the accused,” the court said.
The court said there is no evidence that she knew about the company before its engagement.
“For example the state can prove prior dealing or connection between the accused and the beneficiary of the impugned favours or decision by the public oficer. In this case there was none put before the court that accused may have known or be connected to Drawcard so as to induce her to extend an undue favour of the deal in question. There is no evidence that accused, soon after or before ever received a consideration from Drawcard