FORMER Police Commissioner-General Augustine Chihuri has no
valid legal reason to undermine a High Court order demanding an explanation on
the wealth his family acquired during his 25 years as police chief, says
Attorney-General Prince Machaya.
The unexplained-wealth order obtained by the National
Prosecuting Authority against Chihuri was related to public accountability in
the interest of justice, he said when responding to Chihuri’s court application
challenging the order compelling him to explain his wealth, links to and
interests in several companies, and how his family acquired large property
holdings and other assets.
Adv Machaya also contended that Chihuri and his wife,
Isobel Hakima Khan, had no valid authority to represent their co-applicants,
mainly their relatives, in the civil suit recently filed in the High Court.
He dismissed Chihuri’s contention that the unexplained
wealth order constituted a “gross irregularity and a fundamental breach of
their legal rights” and the request for the High Court to declare certain
provisions of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime (Amendment) Act, 2019,
an infringement of the Constitution.
Adv Machaya said the order was in accordance with a valid
law and did not violate any of the stated constitutional rights and freedoms
and is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society.
He did not comment on the legal position regarding the
constitutionality of the provisions which Chihuri seeks to impugn, saying his
lawyer would deal with the issues.
Chihuri approached the High Court last month after all his
known Zimbabwean assets were placed under management pending an explanation on
his link to the companies and to the properties which the State listed for
possible forfeiture.
The former police chief is being accused of paying US$32
million of public funds into family companies and acquisition of properties.
The order which the NPA obtained when seeking an
explanation also encumbered Chihuri and the family’s properties, placing them
under the management of the Asset Management Unit.
Chihuri, who is being represented by Kantor and Immerman
law firm, argues that when the order was granted, neither he nor others listed
were given any prior notice of the proceedings, nor given an opportunity to respond
to the allegations that support the unexplained-wealth order.
In challenging the constitutionality of the impugned
provisions of the Act at the High Court, Chihuri and his family rely on a
constitutional provision that gives courts subordinate to the Constitutional
Court, the power to make constitutional declarations and to pronounce as
invalid, offensive pieces of legislation, although any such finding is subject
to confirmation by the Constitutional Court.
Chihuri argues that if for any reason, the High Court does
not wish to consider the constitutional matter, then the constitutional
questions he is raising should be referred to the Constitutional Court for
determination, which the AG is not opposing.
The State seeks to freeze Chihuri’s companies and the
properties pending the final outcome of possible criminal investigations and
civil suits.
Justice Felistas Chatukuta in May granted an application by
Prosecutor-General Mr Kumbirai Hodzi for an order forcing Chihuri and his wife
to explain how they acquired their properties and to interdict them from having
any dealings with the companies. Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment