Sports / Soccer
Rushwaya Asiagate trial continues
24 Jul 2012 at 16:57hrs | Views
The defence counsel representing Henrietta Rushwaya in the ongoing Asiagate trial has put an application for exception to the charge saying the charges laid by the state do not disclose an offence.
Putting forward his arguments, Rushwaya's lawyer Jonathan Samukange said all facts alleged by the state in the nine counts of the alleged corrupt concealment of a transaction to a principal are baseless given that ZIFA is not a person, therefore where there is no complainant there is no crime.
He added that the 20 witnesses summoned will do nothing to add value as the contents of the charge do not amount to an offence.
Mr Samukange's application also indicated that the mere concealment of a transaction to a principal alone does not amount to an offence, but is an act of misconduct dealt with by the Labour Court.
He added how the state was misdirected in purporting that Rushwaya failed to disclose the true nature of the transactions in all nine counts, hence the claim is unsubstantiated.
In response the state prosecutors, Mr. Oliver Marwa and Mr Sidom Chinzete opposed the application saying the set of facts accompanying the charges are supportive of charges, hence an application for exception cannot be allowed to stand.
They added that the matter must be allowed to proceed for trial since the subject of the accused, falsely concealing a transaction are peripheral issues which should form part of the accused's defence and not be the basis of the application for exception.
Presiding Regional Magistrate, Ms Esthere Chivasa stood down the matter to the 1st of August for her ruling.
Rushwaya is facing nine counts of corruptly concealing a transaction from a principal as defined in Section 172 subsection 1(a) of the code.
Putting forward his arguments, Rushwaya's lawyer Jonathan Samukange said all facts alleged by the state in the nine counts of the alleged corrupt concealment of a transaction to a principal are baseless given that ZIFA is not a person, therefore where there is no complainant there is no crime.
He added that the 20 witnesses summoned will do nothing to add value as the contents of the charge do not amount to an offence.
Mr Samukange's application also indicated that the mere concealment of a transaction to a principal alone does not amount to an offence, but is an act of misconduct dealt with by the Labour Court.
He added how the state was misdirected in purporting that Rushwaya failed to disclose the true nature of the transactions in all nine counts, hence the claim is unsubstantiated.
In response the state prosecutors, Mr. Oliver Marwa and Mr Sidom Chinzete opposed the application saying the set of facts accompanying the charges are supportive of charges, hence an application for exception cannot be allowed to stand.
They added that the matter must be allowed to proceed for trial since the subject of the accused, falsely concealing a transaction are peripheral issues which should form part of the accused's defence and not be the basis of the application for exception.
Presiding Regional Magistrate, Ms Esthere Chivasa stood down the matter to the 1st of August for her ruling.
Rushwaya is facing nine counts of corruptly concealing a transaction from a principal as defined in Section 172 subsection 1(a) of the code.
Source - zbc
