By Staff Reporter
Fraud-accused Zanu PF businessmen Mike Chimombe and Moses Mpofu have filed a new bail application in a matter they are accused of falsifying documents to secure a Harare City Council street lights tender.
Their bail request is being heard by Magistrate Marewanazvo Gofa who is expected to hand down her ruling on the application next Tuesday.
The latest move follows dismissal of their bail request by the High Court.
Through their lawyers Ashiel Mugiya and Tapson Dzvetero, the two had approached the High Court directly but the court ruled that they should have made an initial application at the Magistrates Court.
In their application the two said they were being victimized as they did not receive the alleged funds personally.
“The State does not allege that which of the applicants received money personally, if at all, after the alleged commission of the offence, which clearly shows a characteristic of victimization which ought to be frowned upon by the courts as the courts cannot be used as a conduit to abuse the criminal justice system.
“Such frowning can be achieved by admitting the applicants to bail since there is no aorta of the state case that can stand the test of time, put differently, the state case is manifestly doomed to fail,” they argued.
RELATED:
- Court dismisses Chimombe’s application denying involvement in US$9 million street lights tender scandal
- Fraud-accused Chimombe, Mpofu trial set for October
- Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission lays more charges on jailed Mike Chimombe, Mpofu
Chimombe and Mpofu also submitted that Juluka Projects Limited, which won the tender should be charged.
“There is no strong evidence that the applicants submitted documents prepared by an unregistered consultant company as alleged. State’s case is weak,” said the lawyers.
The two were arrested in June this year on allegations of defrauding government of US$7 million in a foiled Presidential Goat Scheme.
While locked, the street lights allegations arose and they were rearrested.
They were denied bail by both the Magistrates and the High Court in the first case.
