Namcor bails dashed by missing vehicle, Malima fleeing
Serious charges, missing evidence cited
The missing luxury Audi Q8 and the fact that Victor Malima, the man who allegedly bought it as a bribe for former Namcor managing director Imms Mulunga, is on the run were highlighted among the reasons the Windhoek Magistrate’s Court on Friday denied bail to six people implicated in the Namcor-Enercon corruption scandal.
In a significant ruling, Magistrate Linus Samunzala denied bail to Mulunga, brothers Peter and Malakia Elindi, former Namcor executives Olivia Dunaiski and Jennifer Hamukwaya, and Leo Nandago, citing the seriousness of the charges they are facing, contradictions in their testimonies, and missing evidence crucial to the investigation.
The applicants are accused of fraud, money laundering, and misappropriation of public funds, with substantial public interest in the outcome of the case. Magistrate Samunzala noted that the missing evidence, including the Audi and Malima fleeing the country, “further complicates the case.”
During the formal bail applications, the accused’s legal teams argued that the charges were weak and poorly constructed, labelling them “chaotic” and “half-cooked.” However, Magistrate Samunzala rejected these claims, emphasising that bail proceedings are not the right forum for challenging the merits of a case. “The applicants must specifically make out a case for bail and not rely on the perceived weaknesses of the state’s case,” he said, referencing legal precedents that underline this principle.
Contradictions in testimonies
A key issue highlighted was the inconsistency in the applicants’ testimonies. Mulunga stated he did not know why certain charges were levied against him, while the Elindi brothers claimed they had no direct involvement in the transactions central to the case. Samunzala observed: “It is apparent that the applicants contradicted themselves in material respects, both in their evidence in chief and cross-examination.” These contradictions, he said, reduced the credibility of their defence and contributed to the decision to deny bail.
The magistrate also expressed concern about potential interference with investigations. While the applicants testified they had no intention to obstruct proceedings, the investigating officer argued that their business connections could enable them to influence witnesses or the investigation. Samunzala noted that, though there was only a “remote possibility” of interference, the applicants’ networks and financial interests in the case posed a tangible risk.
Seriousness of the charges
The charges involve approximately N$400 million in public funds and carry potential for significant prison sentences if convictions occur. “These offences involve fraud, money laundering, and contravention of various sections of the ACC Act,” Samunzala explained, underscoring the economic significance of the case. “The misappropriation of public funds affects every Namibian and needs to be seen for the detestable crime it is.”
Another factor in the magistrate’s decision was public interest. The applicants argued that their release would serve the public interest, but Samunzala disagreed, noting the severity of the charges and extensive media coverage. “The public might have certain expectations, which are not synonymous with public interest,” he said. “It is not in the public interest or the administration of justice that the applicants be granted bail.”
Background
The case centres on a controversial July 2022 deal, when Namcor paid Enercon N$53.2 million to acquire service station assets at military bases. The assets were never transferred, and the money allegedly ended up in the personal bank accounts of Namcor officials and their associates. The case also involves massive unpaid fuel debts and alleged irregular transactions between Namcor and private suppliers, including Enercon Namibia and Erongo Petroleum.
Meanwhile, Cedric Willemse, another accused, is undergoing a separate bail hearing, while Panduleni Hamukwaya, Jennifer Hamukwaya’s husband, abandoned his bail application midway through proceedings.
In a significant ruling, Magistrate Linus Samunzala denied bail to Mulunga, brothers Peter and Malakia Elindi, former Namcor executives Olivia Dunaiski and Jennifer Hamukwaya, and Leo Nandago, citing the seriousness of the charges they are facing, contradictions in their testimonies, and missing evidence crucial to the investigation.
The applicants are accused of fraud, money laundering, and misappropriation of public funds, with substantial public interest in the outcome of the case. Magistrate Samunzala noted that the missing evidence, including the Audi and Malima fleeing the country, “further complicates the case.”
During the formal bail applications, the accused’s legal teams argued that the charges were weak and poorly constructed, labelling them “chaotic” and “half-cooked.” However, Magistrate Samunzala rejected these claims, emphasising that bail proceedings are not the right forum for challenging the merits of a case. “The applicants must specifically make out a case for bail and not rely on the perceived weaknesses of the state’s case,” he said, referencing legal precedents that underline this principle.
Contradictions in testimonies
A key issue highlighted was the inconsistency in the applicants’ testimonies. Mulunga stated he did not know why certain charges were levied against him, while the Elindi brothers claimed they had no direct involvement in the transactions central to the case. Samunzala observed: “It is apparent that the applicants contradicted themselves in material respects, both in their evidence in chief and cross-examination.” These contradictions, he said, reduced the credibility of their defence and contributed to the decision to deny bail.
The magistrate also expressed concern about potential interference with investigations. While the applicants testified they had no intention to obstruct proceedings, the investigating officer argued that their business connections could enable them to influence witnesses or the investigation. Samunzala noted that, though there was only a “remote possibility” of interference, the applicants’ networks and financial interests in the case posed a tangible risk.
Seriousness of the charges
The charges involve approximately N$400 million in public funds and carry potential for significant prison sentences if convictions occur. “These offences involve fraud, money laundering, and contravention of various sections of the ACC Act,” Samunzala explained, underscoring the economic significance of the case. “The misappropriation of public funds affects every Namibian and needs to be seen for the detestable crime it is.”
Another factor in the magistrate’s decision was public interest. The applicants argued that their release would serve the public interest, but Samunzala disagreed, noting the severity of the charges and extensive media coverage. “The public might have certain expectations, which are not synonymous with public interest,” he said. “It is not in the public interest or the administration of justice that the applicants be granted bail.”
Background
The case centres on a controversial July 2022 deal, when Namcor paid Enercon N$53.2 million to acquire service station assets at military bases. The assets were never transferred, and the money allegedly ended up in the personal bank accounts of Namcor officials and their associates. The case also involves massive unpaid fuel debts and alleged irregular transactions between Namcor and private suppliers, including Enercon Namibia and Erongo Petroleum.
Meanwhile, Cedric Willemse, another accused, is undergoing a separate bail hearing, while Panduleni Hamukwaya, Jennifer Hamukwaya’s husband, abandoned his bail application midway through proceedings.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article