Staff Reporter
TAMSON Hatuikulipi, who is embroiled in the largest fisheries sector corruption case in the country, amounting to over N$300 million, has made a third attempt to bring a bail application based on alleged new facts uncovered.
Arguing on behalf of the accused, lawyer Mbanga Siyomunji said that the new facts in the matter include the fact that the Fishrot trial did not start on 2 October 2023 and that there are currently no dates set for the trial to start. He added that this is due to legal representation issues.
Siyomunji added that the second new fact is that Hatuikulipi has spent four years and six months in prison, which is one year and five months since the last bail application was dismissed on 27 December 2022. He argued that the time spent in jail by the applicant amounts to new facts, as established by judgments in other matters.
Further to this, Siyomunji argued that the applicant’s financial position continues to deteriorate since his assets were placed under a restraint order. “We are cognizant of the fact that the applicant’s assets were already placed under a restraint order as of 27 December 2022, but the continued deterioration of the financial status and the accumulation of debts due to this is a new fact which we intend to support with evidence not provided in the previous bail application,” Siyomunji argued.
Furthermore, he also pointed out that Hatuikulipi has been deprived of offering emotional support to his two minor children due to the lengthy incarceration.
The lawyer added that Hatuikulipi will produce various communication correspondences with different entities and people, including Johannes Stefansson, to prove that he generated income from a business perspective. “It is common cause that the applicant’s last bail application was dismissed on 27 December 2022. The state made an additional disclosure of 40 lever arch files to the applicant on 1 June 2023. The additional disclosure was not available to the applicant before 1 June 2023, and he is relying on some of it to show that he generated his income from a purely business perspective. The applicant, from the end of last year, according to an order issued by Acting Judge Chinhengo allowing the applicant and co-accused to use computers and have access to the internet, was able to go through his emails and gather various communications that were part of the previous bail application. The state has not had sight of these documents and, as such, cannot indicate that the documents do not constitute new facts,” Siyomunji argued.
He added that the applicant was never part of Namgomar and any bilateral agreements between Namibia and Angola. Siyomunji added that the documents the applicant intends to produce in support of this were never part of his initial bail application, and some of them are from the additional disclosure made on 1 June. He further argued that the same applies to Fishcor and amendments made to the Marine Resources Act 27 of 2000. “The bulk of documents to be used emanate from the additional disclosure made on 1 June 2023,” Siyomunji said.
Meanwhile, State Prosecutor Mossy Ipinge argued that it is the state’s submission that there are no new facts upon which another bail application can be heard. He added that the new application is an abuse of process as it only amplifies points already made in the previous bail application. He added that although the defense lawyer mentioned that the trial did not start on 2 October 2023, the issue that the Fishrot trial will be protracted was already dealt with in previous bail applications.
Furthermore, Ipinge argued that delays in the Fishrot trial are mostly due to delays caused by the accused. Touching on financial deterioration and the waning of emotional ties between Hatuikulipi and his children, Ipinge added that this is a natural consequence of him being denied bail.
He also added that the period of incarceration cannot be considered a new fact, as it is also a natural consequence of bail being denied.
Ipinge also argued that emails dealing with the Namgomar issue were already dealt with in the previous bail application and cannot be repeated, given the fact that Tamson did not wish to comment on the files when presented in court.
The presiding judge in the matter, David Mansu, will tomorrow give a judgment on whether or not the bail application will be heard based on the alleged new facts or be dismissed.
