admin
Daniel Nemukuyu Senior Reporter
Businessman tycoon John Arnold Bredenkamp who is on trial for allegedly swindling a fellow entrepreneur of US$4,2 million, yesterday applied for acquittal at the end of the prosecution’s case.Bredenkamp is facing fraud charges as well as charges of contravening the Exchange Control Act. He is accused of misrepresenting to former Sahawi International director Mr Yakub Ibrahim Mahommed that he was borrowing the money to finance his mining operations in the Democratic Republic of Congo but used the money for personal use and failed to pay it back.
The State also alleges that Bredenkamp misrepresented to Mr Mahommed that he would pay back the borrowed money upon selling his mining company in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
When he sold the company, it is the State’s case that Bredenkamp never paid the debt. Mr Mahommed claims the money he lent to Bredenkamp had been realised from cigarettes sales. It is the State’s case that after realising that Mr Mohammed could finance him, Bredenkamp in 2001, approached him and requested for a loan which he was given at 6 percent interest per annum, capitalised monthly.
The whole transaction is alleged to have taken place at Bredenkamp’s office at number 124 Josiah Chinamano Avenue, Harare. Bredenkamp allegedly did not pay back until this year, when criminal proceedings were instituted against him.
Bredenkamp is also being charged with borrowing foreign currency from an unauthorised dealer without authority from the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.
Yesterday the prosecution comprising Mr Michael Reza, Mr Editor Mavuto and Mr Innocent Chingarande closed its case paving way for Advocate Eric Matinenga to mount an application for discharge.
Justice Felistus Chatukuta would rule on the application today. Adv Matinenga argued that the State had failed to establish the connection between Bredenkamp and the commission of any offence.
He said the State’s allegations were divorced from the fraud charge preferred hence Bredenkamp should be acquitted without even hearing his defence.
On the exchange control charge Mr Matinenga says the State has failed to prove its case and that it should have simply withdrawn the matter.
He said no evidence was led in court to prove the essential elements of the offence.
Adv Matinenga said the matter was purely civil and that the prosecution was a typical case in which a complainant used the criminal courts to recover a debt.
Prosecutor Mr Reza opposed the application arguing that the fact that Bredenkamp made Mr Mahommed to believe that he wanted to use the money to finance mining operations in DRC when he used it on his farm in Zimbabwe, was a misrepresentation. That misrepresentation, according to Mr Reza, justified his arrest on fraud charges.
He said Bredenkamp has a case to answer and that he should be put to him defence. Justice Felistus Chatukuta, however, urged the State to be honest and to admit whenever it does not have a strong case.
Chief Supt Mukazhi said the same docket was closed in 2009 in the public interest only to be re-opened after more information linking Bredenkamp to the offence was received.
Online Reporter