via Kereke refused to play ball in Gono probe, says ZACC | The Herald January 1, 2014 by Daniel Nemukuyu
The Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission investigated the allegations raised against former central bank governor Dr Gideon Gono by Dr Munyaradzi Kereke but, says chairperson Mr Denford Chirindo, Dr Kereke would not provide the required evidence. Responding to the constitutional application by Dr Kereke for the investigation of Dr Gono on fraud, theft and abuse of office allegations, Mr Chirindo confirmed receiving a report on the allegations but said Dr Kereke then refused to co-operate with the investigators.
The ZACC, he said, “took reasonable steps to execute its constitutional mandate to investigate the allegations but was frustrated by the applicant (Dr Kereke), who refused to provide evidence and refused to co-operate and elected to have an independent constitutional body other than the first respondent (ZACC) to investigate the allegations . . .
The ZACC investigation process is not subject to interference from anyone, he said. “It is naïve and baseless for the applicant to allege or mislead this honourable court in believing that first respondent did nothing to execute its constitutional mandate to investigate the allegations from February 28 2012 to October 8 2012 . . .”
Mr Chirindo stated in his opposing affidavit that Dr Kereke, who is accusing Dr Gono of bribing ZACC through hefty packages and allowances, was the one who had earlier personally made an undertaking the assist the commission on behalf of the central bank.
“In the Memorandum of Understanding, it is in fact the applicant (Dr Kereke) and not second respondent (Dr Gono) who on behalf of the RBZ made an undertaking to give first respondent the following:
US$5,5 million for the purchase of houses for all commission staff
56 motor vehicles for all commission staff
US$150 000 for computers and other office logistical support”.
ZACC argues that the application by Dr Kereke has an effect of asking the court to interfere with the commission, which is an independent body.
“The applicant’s appeal to this honourable court is not just an invitation to the court to violate the constitutional provisions guaranteeing the independence of the first respondent (ZACC) but is also an invitation to the court to join him in playing politics,” said Mr Chirindo.
He said the application “is not only malicious but lacks substance, merit and defies logic and practical commonsense”.
Mr Chirindo urged the court to dismiss the application with costs.
He stated in his opposing affidavit that ZACC, like other State bodies, received financial assistance in cash or assets from RBZ for capacity enhancement out of the bank’s quasi-fiscal operations and Dr Kereke was an advisor to the governor.
Mr Chirindo states that Dr Kereke was actually the focal person for ZACC staff for the assistance they received from RBZ during the difficult times of hyperinflation between 2006 and 2009.
The Attorney-General’s Office is representing ZACC in the proceedings and the matter is yet to be set down for hearing.