One of the investors in the forex scheme of Sakaria Megameno Namwandi, who allegedly operated a Ponzi scheme and is accused of defrauding 79 persons to the tune of N$4.3 million during 2019, testified yesterday.
Dankie Boy Shivute testified that he invested N$564 000 with a promised return of N$846 000 over three months. That, however, did not materialise, he said. It is alleged by the State that Namwandi used investments from new investors to pay out older investors.
Windhoek High Court Judge Naomi Shivute already declared the bank records of Namwandi, obtained by the Bank of Namibia (BoN) and the Namibian Police as admissible evidence during the fraud trial.
Namwandi and his entity, Asset Legacy Investment CC, are facing 123 charges of fraud, alternatively theft by false pretences; one count of money laundering; one count of racketeering; one count of conducting banking business while not authorised; and one count of conducting a Ponzi scheme. In addition, he is charged with two counts of tax evasion and two counts of failure to pay tax. He denied all the charges.
It is alleged that Namwandi was the sole member of the entity, and had the duty to conduct legitimate business on behalf of the entity and facilitate the reception of legitimate business funds held at various banks. The State claims that he formulated and operated a Ponzi scheme in which he, through the entity, advertised two types of investment facilities to members of the public, through face-to-face interactions as well as social media platforms. This was done under the guise that the invested funds would be traded on foreign exchange platforms with a return of 50% within 30 days.
Namwandi cried foul about the financial records the State wanted to introduce as evidence, and his Legal Aid-instructed lawyer, Joseph Andreas, claimed the records obtained by the prosecution were done using incorrect procedures. This resulted in a trial-within-a-trial to establish the validity of the records. In her ruling admitting the records as evidence, Judge Shivute found that although the Constitution protects unwarranted interference with the right to privacy, this right is however, not absolute as there is limits to it, it is done in accordance with the law and as necessary in a democratic society for the prevention of crimes and the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
She found that Namwandi’s right to privacy was not infringed because section 64(10) of the Banking Institutions Act provides for the disclosure of bank records, books, registers and correspondence for the purpose of instituting or in the course of any criminal proceedings, provided that such disclosure must be limited to the affairs or account of the customers that is under suspicion. Namwandi’s bank accounts were frozen after his arrest. The State is represented by Advocate Constance Moyo.