Pious Manamike, the former chief executive officer of the Cotton Company of Zimbabwe, has failed in his attempt to overturn the State’s seizure of his property while his fraud case is being resolved.
The Prosecutor-General filed an application in February of last year to take the property in accordance with the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act. Due to this process, the property owner is prohibited from disposing of or selling the assets until the criminal case is resolved.
After reviewing the documents, the High Court made the reasonable assumption that the property in question was tainted and that there was a good chance it would be lost if the order was not granted. Accordingly, the order gave any investigating officer working for the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC) or other law enforcement agency permission to look for and seize the 15 vehicles.
Also read: Harare Man Batsirai Makwengura Wanted for Stealing Thermoplastics Worth US$442 000
Despite being registered under the name of Eternal Resources (Private) Limited, a business in which Manamike and his spouse seemed to be the only directors and shareholders, the cars belonged to Manamike.
Manamike filed a request to have the seizure order in the current case set aside with the High Court, claiming that the order was missing a return date that would have allowed it to be either affirmed or revoked.
In addition, he claimed that the order was improperly obtained as it denied him the opportunity to present his case before an impartial, independent court on their rights to use and dispose of their property.
Judge Benjamin Chikowere, however, rejected the application because he did not think it had any value. The court decided that it was irrelevant since Manamike hasn’t been asked to respond to the accusations against him.
“This court’s interference with the criminal investigations by rescinding the property seizure order, thereby enabling the release, dissipation, and alienation of property reasonably believed to be proceeds of crime, cannot be a proper exercise of discretion,” the judge said.
Prosecution attorney Ms. Molly Mutamangira and Justice Chikowero both agreed that the order was issued in accordance with section 47 of the Money Laundering Act.
Although a property seizure order may be temporary, neither that clause nor the Act as a whole need that it have a return date.
Judge Chikowero said, “When considered in this light, the lack of a return date cannot be a valid reason for the property seizure order to be set aside.”
The judgement emphasised that the purpose of Money Laundering Act s. 47(1)(b) is to allow the application to be submitted without giving the opposing party notice.
He claimed that by providing notice, it would be unnecessary to get a court order authorising the property seizure.
Also read: Prophet Edd Branson Fails to See Future?…Chick D!kmatized by Okwechuku
By providing notice, it would become unnecessary to wait for an order authorising the contaminated property’s seizure to be carried out before the property is lost or alienated. “There is no justification for the order to be set aside,” he said.
The possibility of the property being restored to Manamike exists, contingent upon the conclusion of the inquiry or prosecution.
Manamike and Maxmore Njanji, the former development marketing manager of the firm, were detained in July 2021 due to accusations that they had misused Cottco resources for project funding.
For feedback and comments, please contact ZiMetro News on WhatsApp: +27 82 836 5828.
