News / National
Mupfumira, Masoka case deferred
12 May 2021 at 06:38hrs | Views
THE case in which former Cabinet minister Prisca Mupfumira and ex-Public Service Commission permanent secretary Ngoni Masoka are charged with criminal abuse of office and concealing a transaction from a principal, has been deferred to May 21.
The deferment is pending a High Court determination on the Mupfumira's application for review of Chief Magistrate Mr Munamato Mutevedzi's ruling dismissing her application for separation of their trials.
Mupfumira approached the upper court seeking nullification of Mr Mutevedzi's decision arguing that it was based on evidence and facts that were not placed before the court. Through lawyer Mr Admire Rubaya, Mupfumira applied for a separate trial from Masoka, whom she said was her star witness during trial.
She told the court that Masoka was the accounting officer during their tenure of office and was the best person to articulate transactions that led to her arrest on criminal abuse of office charges, and concealing a transaction from a principal.
Mr Mutevedzi dismissed her application saying there were witnesses who had testified and linked her to the offence during the on-going trial.
In dismissing Mupfumira's application, Mr Mutevedzi said State witnesses, Ray Ndhlukula and James Matiza, had already given evidence that linked her to the offence, but the two are yet to testify. Mupfumira argued that the irregularity made by Mr Mutevedzi could only be cured by the High Court on review.
In the application prepared by Mr Rubaya, Mupfumira cited Mr Mutevedzi and Masoka as respondents. It was argued that the record of proceedings in the regional Magistrates Court would show that Ndhlukula and Matiza had not yet testified and so that the statement that the two had testified and mentioned both co-accused in their testimonies, is therefore not true.
The deferment is pending a High Court determination on the Mupfumira's application for review of Chief Magistrate Mr Munamato Mutevedzi's ruling dismissing her application for separation of their trials.
Mupfumira approached the upper court seeking nullification of Mr Mutevedzi's decision arguing that it was based on evidence and facts that were not placed before the court. Through lawyer Mr Admire Rubaya, Mupfumira applied for a separate trial from Masoka, whom she said was her star witness during trial.
She told the court that Masoka was the accounting officer during their tenure of office and was the best person to articulate transactions that led to her arrest on criminal abuse of office charges, and concealing a transaction from a principal.
Mr Mutevedzi dismissed her application saying there were witnesses who had testified and linked her to the offence during the on-going trial.
In dismissing Mupfumira's application, Mr Mutevedzi said State witnesses, Ray Ndhlukula and James Matiza, had already given evidence that linked her to the offence, but the two are yet to testify. Mupfumira argued that the irregularity made by Mr Mutevedzi could only be cured by the High Court on review.
In the application prepared by Mr Rubaya, Mupfumira cited Mr Mutevedzi and Masoka as respondents. It was argued that the record of proceedings in the regional Magistrates Court would show that Ndhlukula and Matiza had not yet testified and so that the statement that the two had testified and mentioned both co-accused in their testimonies, is therefore not true.
Source - the herald
