News / National
Rushwaya wants her matter referred to the Supreme Court
10 Apr 2013 at 22:24hrs | Views
Former Zifa chief executive Henrietta Rushwaya, facing charges of corruptly concealing transactions from a principal, wants her matter referred to the Supreme Court arguing that her arrest by the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission was an infringement of her constitutional rights.
The charges emanate from soccer matches the senior national soccer team played in Asia.
She is alleged to have arranged trips for the national soccer team to Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Oman, Jordan, Bulgaria, China, Thailand and Yemen between 2007 and 2010 without permission from her superiors.
Rushwaya who is represented by Mr Charles Chinyama of Chinyama and Partners argues that she was arrested by ZAAC without the assistance of the police in direct contravention of the powers bestowed upon the commission in Section 108 of the country's Constitution.
Section 108 (a)(4) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe confers powers to the commission including power to seek assistance from police force and other investigative agencies of the State and through the Attorney General secure prosecution for a person for corruption, theft, abuse of power and other improprieties.
Rushwaya argues that from reading the relevant sections of the Constitution, the Anti-Corruption Commission has no power to effect arrest to any person and its powers cannot go beyond investigation and making inquiries pursuant to receipt of any complaint.
"This application comes against the background of the fact that the Anti-Corruption Commission has since conceded under HC1949/13 wherein it filed consent to an order being granted stopping it from executing in any manner whatsoever, the search warrant issued by the High Court on March 11, 2013 and also seeking to circumvent the interdict issued . . .
"The Minister responsible for police had also written to the chairman of Anti-Corruption Commission stating the commission and employees have no power to effect an arrest on anyone and to do so would be unlawful," submitted Mr Chinyama.
He said the continued prosecution of Rushwaya was a breach of her constitutional rights and it is only proper for the matter to be referred to the Supreme Court for determination on whether her arrest, detention and continued prosecution by the ZACC was constitutional and lawful.
Mr Chinyama argues that apart from not having powers to effect an arrest, ZACC did not receive a complaint from anybody to investigate contrary to the law adding that the principal denied ever making a report either to the police or the commission at all in his capacity as president of Zifa or on his personal behalf.
He further argues that the whole purported ongoing prosecution was nothing but a gimmick, unconstitutional, null and void.
The charges emanate from soccer matches the senior national soccer team played in Asia.
She is alleged to have arranged trips for the national soccer team to Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Oman, Jordan, Bulgaria, China, Thailand and Yemen between 2007 and 2010 without permission from her superiors.
Rushwaya who is represented by Mr Charles Chinyama of Chinyama and Partners argues that she was arrested by ZAAC without the assistance of the police in direct contravention of the powers bestowed upon the commission in Section 108 of the country's Constitution.
Section 108 (a)(4) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe confers powers to the commission including power to seek assistance from police force and other investigative agencies of the State and through the Attorney General secure prosecution for a person for corruption, theft, abuse of power and other improprieties.
Rushwaya argues that from reading the relevant sections of the Constitution, the Anti-Corruption Commission has no power to effect arrest to any person and its powers cannot go beyond investigation and making inquiries pursuant to receipt of any complaint.
"This application comes against the background of the fact that the Anti-Corruption Commission has since conceded under HC1949/13 wherein it filed consent to an order being granted stopping it from executing in any manner whatsoever, the search warrant issued by the High Court on March 11, 2013 and also seeking to circumvent the interdict issued . . .
"The Minister responsible for police had also written to the chairman of Anti-Corruption Commission stating the commission and employees have no power to effect an arrest on anyone and to do so would be unlawful," submitted Mr Chinyama.
He said the continued prosecution of Rushwaya was a breach of her constitutional rights and it is only proper for the matter to be referred to the Supreme Court for determination on whether her arrest, detention and continued prosecution by the ZACC was constitutional and lawful.
Mr Chinyama argues that apart from not having powers to effect an arrest, ZACC did not receive a complaint from anybody to investigate contrary to the law adding that the principal denied ever making a report either to the police or the commission at all in his capacity as president of Zifa or on his personal behalf.
He further argues that the whole purported ongoing prosecution was nothing but a gimmick, unconstitutional, null and void.
Source - TH
