admin
diesel from a South African firm without going to tender, resumed at the High Court yesterday.
The State, led by chief law officer Mr Chris Mutangadura, sought to produce new evidence while re-examining a witness. He sought to produce a list of some foreign companies registered as official fuel suppliers for Noczim.
However, defence lawyer Ms Beatrice Mte-twa raised an objection arguing that was prejudicial to her client.
The argument arose while Mr Mutangadura was re-examining Energy and Power development secretary Mr Justin Mupamhanga.
Only a list of local companies had been part of the record since the commencement of the trial.
Mr Mutangadura now wants to produce an additional copy of the foreign companies to prove that NOOA petroleum was not recognised.
Justice Chinembiri Bhunu deferred the ruling because he needed time to consider the submissions made.
Ms Mtetwa argued that the production of the said document was tantamount to amending the charge without seeking leave of the court.
She said the production of the document was a disguised application to amend the charge sheet considering the document was never shown to Mangoma and that it was never part of the State’s case.
The prosecution, she argued, should not be allowed to patch the gaps that open during trial through production of strange documents.
But Mr Mutangadura hit back saying the document was not new since it was part of the docket.
He added that Mangoma would not be prejudiced in any way since Mr Mupamhanga had clearly indicated the existence of a separate list of another category of suppliers.
Mr Mutangadura said the objection by Mrs Mtetwa was premature and that it should be overruled.
Mangoma is denying the charge claiming it is a political gimmick.
He says his prosecution is a political attempt to persecute him and his party (MDC-T).
The procurement of fuel, he argues, is not part of his duties and that if any offence was committed, then the officials responsible for that duty should be answerable.
Online Reporter