Fraud-accused former Multichoice employee's bid postponed
Couple faces money laundering, theft charges
An application challenging the allegedly unconstitutional acquirement of documents implicating a fraud-accused married couple has been postponed until the end of the month.
An application ruling involving a former Multichoice Namibia employee, which was scheduled for yesterday, has been postponed until the end of this month. Manga Nawa-Mukena is facing money laundering and theft charges alongside her husband, Joseph Mukena. She was employed at the local video entertainment company between April 2013 and March 2017.
The couple filed an application challenging the constitutionality of Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Section 64(10)(d) of the Banking Institutions Act in early July 2022. They are asking Prosecutor-General Martha Imalwa to rule that documents collected by the police during an investigation should be excluded as evidence in their criminal prosecution.
Furthermore, they request the cancellation of all notices issued under Section 179(1)(b) in their case and seek coverage of costs if the application is opposed, along with any other relief the court deems appropriate.
'Absurd outcome'
In her founding affidavit filed in November 2022, Imalwa said Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act grants the power to the police or the prosecution to issue a notice requiring a person to appear in court or to produce certain documents as part of a criminal investigation, a section often used to compel witnesses to provide testimony or submit evidence in ongoing investigations or court proceedings.
"The interpretation [the couple] are advocating for regarding Section 179, if accepted, would result in an absurd outcome," the affidavit read.
In the same vein, their challenge of Section 64(10) of the Banking Institutions Act lacks merit, Imalwa said.
"Bank documents related to the affairs or accounts of any banking institution are not protected from interference under Article 13 of the constitution. Even if they were, I would still argue that the section is constitutional."
Falsified invoices
Nawa-Mukena and her husband are facing charges of fraud, forgery, obstruction of justice and other offences related to allegedly falsifying invoices for DSTV and GOTV advertisements in the Kundana Weekly newspaper.
Police investigations alleged that between January 2014 and March 2017, Nawa-Mukena directed Multichoice to deposit over N$2 million into her bank account rather than paying Kundana for advertisements that were supposedly placed in the publication.
Between 2017 and 2018, the police issued notices to various organisations to collect documents related to these alleged offences. However, the couple’s legal representative, Kadhila Amoomo, argued that these notices did not meet the legal requirements.
As opposed to gathering evidence for a trial, the notices were used by the police to collect information for their investigation, and the couple received these documents as part of the investigation file, he said.
Representing the prosecutor-general, Nixon Marcus argued that the challenge to the admissibility of documents obtained under Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act should be addressed in as part of the ongoing criminal proceedings.
The couple filed an application challenging the constitutionality of Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Section 64(10)(d) of the Banking Institutions Act in early July 2022. They are asking Prosecutor-General Martha Imalwa to rule that documents collected by the police during an investigation should be excluded as evidence in their criminal prosecution.
Furthermore, they request the cancellation of all notices issued under Section 179(1)(b) in their case and seek coverage of costs if the application is opposed, along with any other relief the court deems appropriate.
'Absurd outcome'
In her founding affidavit filed in November 2022, Imalwa said Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act grants the power to the police or the prosecution to issue a notice requiring a person to appear in court or to produce certain documents as part of a criminal investigation, a section often used to compel witnesses to provide testimony or submit evidence in ongoing investigations or court proceedings.
"The interpretation [the couple] are advocating for regarding Section 179, if accepted, would result in an absurd outcome," the affidavit read.
In the same vein, their challenge of Section 64(10) of the Banking Institutions Act lacks merit, Imalwa said.
"Bank documents related to the affairs or accounts of any banking institution are not protected from interference under Article 13 of the constitution. Even if they were, I would still argue that the section is constitutional."
Falsified invoices
Nawa-Mukena and her husband are facing charges of fraud, forgery, obstruction of justice and other offences related to allegedly falsifying invoices for DSTV and GOTV advertisements in the Kundana Weekly newspaper.
Police investigations alleged that between January 2014 and March 2017, Nawa-Mukena directed Multichoice to deposit over N$2 million into her bank account rather than paying Kundana for advertisements that were supposedly placed in the publication.
Between 2017 and 2018, the police issued notices to various organisations to collect documents related to these alleged offences. However, the couple’s legal representative, Kadhila Amoomo, argued that these notices did not meet the legal requirements.
As opposed to gathering evidence for a trial, the notices were used by the police to collect information for their investigation, and the couple received these documents as part of the investigation file, he said.
Representing the prosecutor-general, Nixon Marcus argued that the challenge to the admissibility of documents obtained under Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act should be addressed in as part of the ongoing criminal proceedings.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article