Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Fitty’s bail application hits snag

Fitty’s bail application hits snag

Iuze Mukube

Acting Judge David Munsu dismissed the bail application by Tamson ‘Fitty’ Hatuikulipi, who is one of the Fishrot accused, due to an absence of new facts.

Judge Munsu said the grounds put forth by the applicant as new facts were already dealt with during his second bail application in the High Court in 2022.

In essence, Hatuikulipi had merely presented additional documents in an attempt to demonstrate that the State does not have a prima facie case against him. 

Hatuikulipi claimed to have new facts for this application when he appeared before Judge Munsu for his bail hearing late last month.

During the hearing, his lawyer Mbanga Siyomunji argued that the applicant had been in custody since his arrest in 2019, meaning that his incarceration had been prolonged with no indication when his trial would begin.

Siyomunji stressed how important it was for the applicant to be reunited with his family after five years of incarceration, since he had only seen two of his minor children once.

He stated that Hatuikulipi’s financial situation continues to deteriorate since his assets have been placed under restraint order. Thus, there won’t be any prejudice if he is released on bail.

He further argued that since the applicant has been in detention for five years, the court can impose conditions on his bail if they are concerned about the public’s interest.

“The fishing industry is a billion-dollar industry. As such, there is nothing untoward for the applicant to receive millions of dollars for a service rendered,” stated Siyomunji.

This was in response to allegations the applicant received millions of dollars that were unaccounted for, as questioned by the State.

Siyomunji further buttressed that the applicant’s involvement was purely business-related for providing consultancy via his correspondence and communications with various entities allegedly involved in the scandal.

The lawyer said as the applicant was never part of the bilateral agreement between Namibia and Angola, keeping him in detention would not serve the public interest or the administration of justice.

The state, represented by Hesekiel Iipinge, opposed the granting of bail on the same grounds as before that the applicant is facing serious charges involving a criminal syndicate, and if found guilty, a lengthy custodial sentence will be imposed.

Iipinge was adamant that the State has a strong case against the applicant and as such, there is a strong possibility that he may interfere with State witnesses and evidence.

He added that there was a legitimate fear that the applicant may flee, especially given the strong evidence that backs up the grave accusations made against him, and that the period of incarceration does not entitle the accused to be granted bail.

“If the accused in the Fishrot case can delay the trial while in custody, what will happen when out on bail?” stressed Iipinge, who contended that the alleged new facts did not constitute any new findings in the case.

Agreeing, Judge Munsu said the present application and all the grounds put forth by the applicant were not new facts.

He added that the applicant may have denied being involved in the Namgomar matter, but evidence showed otherwise, as some payments he received reflected as coming from Namgomar.

The applicant’s version that he had received payments for introducing a list of clients to Ricardo Gustavo was not proven, as he was unable to mention a single client that he had introduced.

In the same vein, the applicant’s claim that he had assisted clients in Angola contradicts his own version that one of the reasons he was unwilling to assist Samherji in Angola was because of a language barrier.

Thus, Judge Munsu stated that as he understood the case, the issue is not about the fact that millions of dollars were paid to the applicant’s entities, but the failure to account, more so, when such funds were supposed to benefit the public.

“So, to argue that there is no prima facie case against the applicant is to gloss over the above evidence in print and on affidavit. 

It is in the interest of the applicant that the matter proceeds to trial, the platform where he will meet his accusers, and will have an opportunity to discredit their versions,” said Judge Munsu.

While dismissing the application, he concluded that the applicant’s additional documents offered no new perspective to the matter, and therefore, Hatuikulipi is to remain in custody pending trial.

-mukubeiuze@gmail.com