Connect with us

Uncategorized

JUROL 101 – USING FACTS TO EXPOSE CROSS-BORDER FRAUD ON COURTS

Published

on

  1. In the quest to build an Africa that works for all, one must start from the individual in whose name a government establishes its legitimacy.
  2. The fight for independence was essentially framed as a fight to assert civil rights to all the people who lived under unjust and unaccountable systems of government.
  3. It is the case that in most underdeveloped nations, illiteracy is pervasive resulting in many thinking that the government is the property of public office bearers and the ordinary folk have no stake in shaping and defining its character and personality.
  4. What then is civic literacy? Some have defined it as the knowledge and skills to participate effectively in civic life through knowing how to stay informed, understanding governmental processes, and knowing how to exercise the rights and obligations of citizenship at local, state, national, and global levels.
  5. The Justice Under Rule of Law (JUROL) initiative was created to raise awareness using case studies so that the building of an inclusive Africa can be fast-tracked if shared understanding can be established on what it means to be a citizen.
  6. There are far too many people who think that citizenship is free, and the government is some dairy cow that can be the provider of that which is needed to sustain life.
  7. In a democratic society, even the President is not above the law and vigilance is the only medicine to avoid the creation of an Imperial-like President.
  8. One of the JUROL members whose identity is JUROL00079 stated: “The judicial system and its administration must live up to the promise for the public to have confidence that justice is the sole reason for the system to exist.

In all adversarial proceedings, litigants have a duty of full disclosure and honesty with the Court.

I have just read Mupasiri’s court application in which the evidence is crystally clear that on 6 September 2004, Chinamasa issued a reconstruction order in relation to SMM Holdings Private Limited (SMM), a company that was incorporated and operating in terms of the laws of Zimbabwe, whose effect was to divest the company’s shareholders and directors of the control and management of the company.

He relied on the same order to vest the control and management not only of SMM as a juristic entity but of all companies deemed to be under the control of Mr. Mutumwa Mawere, a Zimbabwean-born South African resident and citizen at all material times.

Pursuant to this decree, the Administrator who was appointed by the then Minister of Justice, Hon Chinamasa, assumed the control and management of the targeted companies.

It is the legal and constitutional implications of this change of control that has provoked members of the Friends of Shabanie and Mashava Mines (FOSMM) Trust to invest in understanding the prescripts of the rule of law and constitutionalism.

Before I joined the JUROL and FOSMM initiatives, I was not aware that a company whose control and management were divested by an act of state automatically became an organ of state and as such the Administrator assumed to role of an agent of the government that appointed him.

It is the case that directors are appointed by shareholders, and once appointed owe a fiduciary duty to the company, unlike the Administrator who is appointed and can be removed by the Minister.

 The Administrator so appointed does not owe any due of care to the company but to the Appointing Authority.

What I have read from the Mupasiri application is shocking in that following his appointment, Gwaradzimba, used the agency of DMH Attorney whose principal, Mr. Edwin Manikai, was part of President Mnangagwa’s ascendancy project.

According to Manikai, a major political fallout took place between Mawere and the current President of Zimbabwe that resulted in Manikai taking sides with Mnangagwa in relation to the SMM matter.

Manikai whose firm was a legal advisor to SMM found himself attacking his former client all because of political ulterior gains.

DMH was also appointed or self-appointed to act on behalf of the government of Zimbabwe in all matters related to SMM’s reconstruction.

This is what President Mnangagwa in his affidavit opposing Mawere’s application that was filed on 14 April 2022 to impeach him for failure to fulfill his constitutional obligations stated in relation to the agency of DMH in his own matter:

  • It is clear from the above that accordingly to President Mnangagwa and to the extent that the Mupasiri application was primarily concerned about the President’s state of knowledge and involvement in the matters related to SMM’s reconstruction including the litigations in South Africa, it followed that DMH was the subject matter expert.
  • It is this expertise that allowed Manikai to be involved in the SA litigations on an exclusive basis.
  • His firm instructed the firm, Brink Cohen Le Roux Inc. (BCLR), to prosecute the matters in South Africa on behalf of SMM under the control of an organ of the government of Zimbabwe.
  • There is no dispute in relation to Mupasiri application in SA that the legal status of Steelnet could not have been a company as universally understood and certainly in terms of the laws of South Africa.
  • I had no idea that a foreign representative of a company in liquidation must be recognized by the Cross Border Insolvency Act of 2000 before he can assert any rights in relation to a debtor that is situated in South Africa.
  • It is not in dispute that Steelnet was a Zimbabwean company and Gwaradzimba was appointed as Administrator based on a Zimbabwean decree.
  • What is striking and should have been known by BCLR lawyers is that Gwaradzimba’s appointment to act on behalf of Steelnet was not preceded by any judicial proceedings and as such there was no law that could permit him to have an audience before any South African court yet in this bizarre matter, Gwaradzimba’s authority to act in South Africa did not comply with the laws of the country.
  • It follows that the SA Courts had no discretion at all to recognize and enforce the authority of Gwaradzimba to act on behalf of Steelnet.
  • In this instant matter, it cannot be disputed that Gwaradzimba invaded the SA jurisdictional space with the complicity of the officers of the court who knew and ought to have known that absent permission granted by the SA court, the locus to litigate in SA by Steelnet or any company represented by Gwaradzimba was a nullity and all the judgments were void and unenforceable.
  • It is trite that the Zimbabwean decree that was used by Chinamasa was only applicable in relation to companies operating in Zimbabwe and not in SA.
  • I can, therefore, confirm that fraud was certainly committed in the SA courts and no independent, competent, and impartial SA lawyer would openly expose himself to this unconscionable fraud and actually obtain a judgment in favour of a foreign government based on a decree that offends SA public policy.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Uncategorized

HH stands accused of hypocrisy

Published

on

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Do you agree with Mahere of CCC that Mnangagwa’s use of Presidential Powers is ultra vires his oath of office?

Published

on

Mnangagwa Abusing Presidential Powers – CCC

The opposition CCC says President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s use of Presidential Powers to legalize the hike in interest rates by 200% is unconstitutional.

Mnangagwa used the Act to promulgate Statutory Instrument 118A  of 2022 gazetted on Monday.

SI 118A/22 stipulates that the multiple currency regime will exist until December 2025 and sets a ZWL$20 million fine for retailers selling goods at exchange rates above 10% of the prevailing interbank rate.

CCC national spokesperson, Fadzayi Mahere, Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act is unconstitutional. Said Mahere:

In any event, a presser is not a law. These repeated illegal statements fertilize mistrust (and) the Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act is unconstitutional as it offends section 134 of the Constitution.

They purport to use this law to ‘entrench’ (whatever that means) the use of the US$ for five years, yet even that unconstitutional law only empowers the making of SIs that last for six months.

Strangely, they set interest rates at 200% yet under the common law, interest must never exceed 100% of the debt in terms of the common law in duplum rule which has not been repealed.

This is the poorly thought out, legally unsound approach they prefer to policymaking.

CCC deputy president, Tendai Biti, who was the Finance Minister during the Government of National Unity (GNU) era, said:

Presidential decrees are an authoritarian abuse of citizens and Parliament.

The re-legalization of the US$ is an embarrassing acknowledgment of the failure of four years of vigorous pursuit of a de-dollarization agenda that was never going to work.

The Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) Act allows a President to bypass Parliament and make laws.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Remember this:

Published

on

Continue Reading

Trending

WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com