Staff Reporter<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MAREN de Klerk, a lawyer implicated in the national fishing and corruption scandal, \u201cFishrot\u201d, has hit back at sentiments made by the Inspector General of the Namibian Police, Lieutenant General Joseph Shikongo, in which Shikongo said that De Klerk cannot seek redress from the court on seized assets while allegedly being a fugitive from Namibian courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
De Klerk, in an ongoing legal battle to secure his pension benefits of about N$1.3 million, said that Shikongo appears to rely on authorities which allegedly support the proposition that a person characterised as a \u201cfugitive from justice\u201d should be denied access to the courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe First Respondent (Shikongo) has failed to identify any binding Namibian authority which establishes that a litigant forfeits the right to approach the courts merely because allegations have been made that he is a fugitive from justice. In the absence of such authority, the First Respondent\u2019s argument is unsustainable. The Constitution guarantees every person the right to approach the courts for the protection of their rights. Article 12 of the Constitution provides that disputes relating to civil rights and obligations must be determined by a competent court,\u201d De Klerk said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
He further argued that his retirement pension is, by no stretch of the imagination, the proceeds of unlawful activities and added that it was accrued from years of hard work as a lawyer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
De Klerk further said that the Namibian Police seek to justify the seizure and continued withholding of his pension benefits by relying on Section 28 of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThat reliance is misplaced. The statutory scheme created by the Prevention of Organised Crime Act provides that property alleged to constitute \u201crealisable property\u201d may be restrained only by order of the High Court upon application by the Prosecutor-General. In any event, Chapter 5 of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act requires a demonstrable nexus between the property sought to be preserved or forfeited and the alleged unlawful activity. The First Respondent has failed to establish such a link. In the absence of this jurisdictional requirement, the provisions of Chapter 5 cannot properly be invoked,\u201d De Klerk said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Currently, the matter is seized with an interlocutory application wherein the Namibian Police are seeking acceptance of a late-filed replying affidavit, a motion which is being opposed by De Klerk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Photo: File<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Staff Reporter MAREN de Klerk, a lawyer implicated in the national fishing and corruption scandal, \u201cFishrot\u201d, has hit back at sentiments made by the Inspector General of the Namibian Police, Lieutenant General Joseph Shikongo, in which Shikongo said that De Klerk cannot seek redress from the court on seized assets while allegedly being a fugitive …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10,"featured_media":393851,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-393848","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news"],"yoast_head":"\n