Herentals’ defence outline revealed

Tadious Manyepo Sports Reporter
HERENTALS will argue that the ruling, which found them guilty of match-fixing, was an invalid judgment signed by only two of the three PSL disciplinary committee members, with one of them even signing it twice.

The Students will also argue that there was “no sufficient and satisfactory evidence to support the guilty verdict against the Appellant (Herentals) and the conviction of the Appellant is accordingly set aside.’’

They will claim the PSL Disciplinary Committee “erred and misdirected itself at law in failing to consider the evidence of the appellant in that it did not participate in any activity that is corrupt, dishonest or illegal.’’

The club will also question why the same committee “failed to justify why it could not also convict the 2nd Respondent (Black Rhinos), considering the charge should have implicated the purported receiver and the purported giver of the alleged token of bribe.’’

Herentals will today appear before the ZIFA Appeals Committee, pleading for relief, after they docked three points, following the guilty verdict.

They are being accused of influencing the result of their 3-0 win over Black Rhinos in a league match last year.

Herentals, who will be relegated from the Premiership, in the event their appeal fails, were docked three points and slammed with a $300 000 fine.

Former Black Rhinos team manager, Gift Kamuriwo, who was also sanctioned by the PSL disciplinary committee, provided an affidavit saying, indeed, he was the middleman in the shoddy deal to manipulate the result of that match.

Rhinos forward, Gift Saunyama, also provided supporting documents backing the story that Herentals officials, indeed, started a process to influence the result of that match to survive the chop.

In the event the Students are relegated, Chapungu — where former Zimbabwe captain Moses Chunga started work as head coach on Monday — will take their place in the top-flight league.

Yesterday, The Herald got a copy of the Herentals appeal, prepared by their lawyers, Chimwamurombe Legal Practice, whose heads of argument the Students will use to try and have the guilty verdict overturned.

The Harare club will argue that:

1. The purported judgment of the PSL Disciplinary Committee is incompetent and invalid by reason of having been signed by only two out of the three members who sat as the PSL Disciplinary Committee, with the Chairperson purportedly signing the judgment twice.

The fatal irregularity on the signatures raises doubt as to whether the judgment was arrived at by the full PSL Disciplinary Committee.

2. The PSL Disciplinary Committee grossly erred at law thereby vitiating its judgment by failing to pronounce its judgment and sentence at the end of the sitting as stipulated in the mandatory provisions of Order 34.5 of the PSL Rules and Regulations. The fatal non-compliance with Order 34.5 opened the decision-making process of the PSL Disciplinary Committee to possible manipulation and interference to the prejudice of the Appellant.
3. The PSL Disciplinary Committee grossly erred at law thereby vitiating its judgment by failing to hand down the written judgment within the three days’ time after the hearing of the 26th of November 2019 and, thereafter, to forthwith hand over the judgment to the PSL chief executive officer as stipulated in the mandatory provisions of Order 34.7 of the PSL Rules and Regulations. The written judgment was purportedly written on the 8th of January 2020 and only released on the 22nd of January 2020, which constitutes a fatal non-compliance with Order 34.7 of the PSL Rules and Regulations, rendering the purported judgment null and void.
4. The Disciplinary Committee further erred by disregarding the evidence of the 2nd Appellant who was simply a football supporter and could not have the criminal capacity to perpetrate the offence as laid in the charge sheet.
5. The findings of the Disciplinary Committee were not reasonable on the evidence and on the law.
6. There was an unconstitutional misrepresentation to the Appellants herein before the hearing by the Premier Soccer League chief executive officer that they could not be represented by legal practitioners. This points to malice on the part of the Premier Soccer League as well.
7. The disciplinary committee misdirected itself by passing a heavy penalty which unfairly overrides the justifiable mitigatory factors which were presented, rightly so by the appellants.

Similar cases were not treated with such heavy penalty.

The case will decide when the domestic Premiership will start.