Iuze Mukube
Tamson ‘Fitty’ Hatuikulipi, one of the key figures implicated in the Fishrot corruption, fraud and racketeering scandal, is now seeking permission to take his fight for release to the Supreme Court.
Last Friday, he lodged an application in the High Court to appeal his previous bail application based on new facts.
Acting Judge David Munsu denied his third application for bail last year, citing he did not put forth new facts to be considered, and failed to account for the millions paid into his accounts.
During the hearing, his lawyer Mbanga Siyomunji submitted that the court did not consider the new facts against the totality of all the facts before it concluded in his bail on new facts last year.
Siyomunji implored the court to grant his client leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, believing it will come to a different conclusion.
He argued the judge erred in not considering that much of the documentation used during the last bail application, based on new facts, emanated from additional disclosure made by the State on 3 June 2023.
This includes documents that confirm Hatuikulipi had a legitimate business relationship as a consultant with Samherji, and assisted it in forming joint ventures with local fishing rights holders.
Those communications between his client were purely business-related through his consultancy service agreement, the lawyer argued. He also argued that the judge erred in law and/or fact by not considering that all the contractual agreements between Samherji and various entities that his client produced were not available during the applicant’s previous bail applications.
Further, the court erred by not considering the evidence presented showing that Hatuikulipi paid back money borrowed from James Hatuikulipi.
Siyomunji argued that the learned judge erred in law and/or fact by not considering that the applicant was paid money by Marén de Klerk as per the instructions of James Hatuikulipi, and that the applicant himself had no dealings with Fishcor.
That the judge erred in not considering that the trial did not start on 2 October 2023, and there are currently still no specific trial dates set, all of which are of no fault of Tamson.
Additionally, the court failed to consider evidence of his deteriorating financial situation, and the amounts owed by his property to the Body Corporate and City of Windhoek, which has led to civil action.
Further, the judge erred in concluding that there were no new facts presented in the bail application on new facts.
Munsu had stated last year that Tamson had merely presented additional documents to demonstrate that the State does not have a prima facie case against him.
“These had to do with his invoices, supply agreements and the DRC army. However, the documents he relied on were in existence at the time of his second bail application. On this basis alone, the application stands to be dismissed,” he said.
The decision on the matter will be delivered on 25 March 2025.