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.

Judge questions advance payments to Mwapopi

Home Crime and Courts Judge questions advance payments to Mwapopi
Judge questions advance payments to Mwapopi

Roland Routh

Windhoek High Court Judge Shafimana Uietele on Tuesday questioned the advance payments for “consultancy work not yet done” by bail-seeking Phillipus Mwapopi. 

The judge posed the questions at the end of his cross-examination by prosecutor Cliff Lutibezi. 

During his cross-examination, Mwapopi revealed he received several upfront payments, amounting to millions of dollars, from various fishing entities for consultancy work yet to be done. 

In fact, the judge wanted to know how he could issue invoices in January for consultancy work to be carried out during the next six months and then again in June for consultancy work to be carried out during July to December. 

Mwapopi was at pains to answer, and he explained he had a contract with Deep Ocean Processors to provide consultancy services such as catering, vessel maintenance and repairs. 

He explained he provided training on personal hygiene and whether to order prepared meals or procure raw foodstuff to prepare on board.

The judge further had an issue with Mwapopi receiving payments for the whole of 2018 while his “contract” with the fishing entity was terminated in April 2018. 

He explained that although the contract was terminated, the company had to fulfil the stipulations of the contract and paid him out for the full duration of the contract period.

After he was excused from the bench, South African senior advocate Vas Soni informed the court he is on record for former justice minister Sacky Shanghala, former CEO of Investec Namibia James Hatuikulipi, and Pius Natangwe Mwatelulo – and that his clients would not take the stand but will rely on a notice of motion supported by an affidavit for their release on bail.

In their affidavits, the three Fishrot accused commonly argue the criminal proceedings against them are a result of unlawful investigations by the Anti-Corruption Commission, certainly in respect of the racketeering and money laundering charges. 

According to them, the ACC is not allowed to investigate cases under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act (Poca) under which the charges of racketeering and money laundering fall. 

“Documents that form part of the court files in the proceedings make it clear that the investigations were initiated, spearheaded – and for the most part, they were conducted by members of the ACC. Accordingly, they argue, it is obvious that since the ACC is not sanctioned by their Act to investigate instances of racketeering and money laundering, the prosecutor general cannot institute such charges on a lawful basis.”

 They further indicated they will formally challenge the lawfulness of the institution of the charges of racketeering and money laundering or at least the lawfulness of the decision to charge them with the offences.

Shanghala, James and Mwatelulo are facing two counts of racketeering and four counts of money laundering, as well as several counts of using office for ratification, fraud, theft and tax evasion. 

Shanghala faces a separate charge of defeating or attempting to defeat the course of justice with another accused Nigel van Wyk.

– rrouth@nepc.com.na