Kesi ya Mahalu: Nani kilaza hapa?

Kwa hakika, makala iliyohusu EL haikuwa mahsusi katika ukumbi huu, ilipita katika anga zangu nikawa naisukuma kwa wapigania uhuru ambao wameihariri na kuitoa katika gazeti la Mwana Halisi toleo la jana ukurasa wa tano ikiwa na kichwa "Lowasa usinong'one sema hadharani" ikielezea kwamba kama kweli yeye ni msafi ajitokeze kusema, "Manji amewanga wajumbe wa kamati" na ikibidi asaidie kuchukuliwa hatua, ili watu wajue kwamba Manji hana wadhifa juu ya wote na watu wasione kwamba naye alihusika katika huo mgawo.

Cha msingi, mwandishi wa makala ile huenda alikua na lengo la kutaka umma uamini kuwa EL hana rekodi ya rushwa na kwamba tusikumbushie Tume ya Warioba, tusikumbushie kauli za Nyerere na tusikumbukie suala la Richmond, tusichokonoe undani wa kuondoka City Water na mengine mengi.

Kwa hakika EL ana kazi kubwa kuishawishi jamii ya sasa kuwa yeye ni msafi kabla ya safari yake kuelekea anakotaka (IKULU)
 
Heshima yako Halisi
Je unaweza kutuwekea page hiyo hapa ukumbuni watu tujimwage ?Hebu fanya janja yote yanawezekana siku hizi.Wengine tuko mbali na Jijini kupat copy
 
Mwana Halisi bado hawana website ila nitawsiliana nao leo baadaye ili wawe wanatupa habari zao na sisi kuziweka katika forum watu wachangie. Kwa waliopo TZ wanaweza kulisoma
 
Kaka halisi,

Hizi habari za mtanzania mwenye asili ya kihindi kuingia kitanznini ni kweli? Ni yupi? Kadogoo ama king maker wetu?

Kazi njema kaka

Tanzanianjema
 
Binafsi sioni kabisa sheria ya kusema hii ni kesi ya wizi!...
kesi hii inaweza kuwa popote maanake Ununuzi wa nyumba hiyo ni investment ya serikali..unapotumia njia za udanganyifu ktk investment za serikali ni moja ya hujumu za kiuchumi, sifahamu lugha nyingine tofauti.

Hivi kweli mhujumu wa uchumi huwa anafanya kitu gani kisichohusisha wizi ama rushwa!.
 
THISDAY REPORTER
Dar es Salaam

THE government has filed a notice of intent to appeal against bail granted by a Dar es Salaam court to the former Tanzanian ambassador to Italy, Prof. Costa Ricky Mahalu, and two others on grounds that first they have to deposit at least half of the over two million euros they are charged with embezzling.

Legal records show that the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) has registered the appeal notice with the Kisutu Resident Magistrate's Court, which granted the bail application submitted by Prof. Mahalu and the two other accused, Steward Prosper Migwano and Ms Grace Alfred Martin, both also former officials at the Tanzanian embassy in Rome.

The trio is facing charges brought against them by the government, regarding corruption and theft of a total of 2,065,827/60 euros (aprox. 3bn/- being property of the Tanzanian government.

A highly-placed source in the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs has told THISDAY that the government is currently putting final touches to the formal appeal document soon to be filed at the Kisutu court.

The source confirmed that the aim of the appeal is to ensure that the three accused are obliged by the court to deposit at least half of the allegedly stolen money (equivalent to some one million-plus euros or 1.5bn/-) in accordance with the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act, as part and parcel of their bail conditions.

On January 22, the same day of their first appearance at the Kisutu court to answer the charges brought against them, Prof. Mahalu, Migwano and Ms Martin were all released on bail after fulfilling conditions which consisted of each securing two reliable sureties able to sign bonds of 5m/- each. This amounted to 30m/- in total.

The accused were also ordered to surrender their traveling documents to the court, and were restrained from leaving the city without express permission from the court.

The government avers that according to the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act, any person prosecuted under the said law must deposit half of the amount of money involved in the case.

''The Director of Public Prosecution, on behalf of the United Republic, has lodged a notice of intent to appeal, dated and filed on the 6th day of February 2007, against the ruling of the Kisutu Resident Magistrate's Court of 22nd January 2007,'' asserts part of the intent letter submitted to the Kisutu court.

According to other government sources contacted by THISDAY, the DPP's office is also contemplating approaching the High Court for a review of the Kisutu court bail ruling in favour of the three accused despite the fact that their case falls under the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act.

The three accused were originally arraigned before the Kisutu court on January 22 this year to answer charges of stealing, deceiving, fraud, cheating and misconduct in relation to the purchase of the Tanzanian embassy building in Rome.

Before Senior Resident Magistrate Sivangilwa Mwangesi, Prevention of Corruption Bureau (PCB) prosecutors Joseph Holle, Tabu Mzee and Benny Lincoln alleged that Prof. Mahalu conspired with the other two accused to inflate the purchase price of the building from 1,0323,913.98 euros (actual) to 3,098,741.58 euros (false) and pocket the difference (2,065,827.60 euros) between them.

According to the prosecutors, the accused conspired to indicate in payment vouchers and other related documents that the building was indeed purchased at a price of 3,098,741.58 euros, information they knew to be false and intended to mislead their employer (the government), contrary to the Prevention of Corruption Act.

Amongst the counts they face are conspiracy to commit an offence, use of documents containing erroneous material intended to mislead their principal (the government), stealing by persons in public service, and occasioning loss to a specified authority.

At the time of the alleged offence (2002), Prof. Mahalu was the incumbent Tanzanian ambassador to Italy, while Migwano was finance attach at the embassy and Ms Martin was the counselor. Prof. Mahalu continued as ambassador in Italy until early March of last year, when President Jakaya Kikwete recalled him in the midst of PCB investigations into the alleged scam.

All three have denied the charges and their case is scheduled to come up for mention again on Tuesday next week (March 20).
 
Damn...that is some serious dosh..I hope they have it. Otherwise, Keko/Ukonga au Segerea kunawasubiri.
 
Yebo yebo isije ikawa wanataka kupoza makali ya Ditto ki aina . Hawa jamaa ni wajanja na kumbuka Kulikoni na This Day ni magazeti ya wana mtandao yanaendesha na usalama wa Taifa na kazi yao ni sawa ya Kulikoni hapa jambo.

Nina wasi wasi kama kweli wako serious. Why took them so long kuamua hivyo hadi watu wanagoma juu ya Ditto ndipo na wao wanasema ?
 
Mimi nasema kuna mbinu za hali ya juu na sasa mmeona haya . Nia ni kuzima issue ua Ditto. Yaani Mahalu alitumika kuzima issue ya RDC na sasa anatumika tena kuzima issue ya Ditto na mgomo na labda kuwa ondoa watu toka Mahakama kuu na Uchaguzi Tunduru . Huu ndiyo usalama wa wa CCM na si Taifa .
 
Jamani tuacheni mawazo finyu ya kugandamiza hoja. Masuala ya USALAMA WA TAIFA tokea enzi za Nyerere na katika nchi nyingi za Afrika yanatumika kuficha uozo na kukandamiza demokrasia na haki. Tujadili HOJA na si kuziwekea uzio wa mambo kama vile, MTANDAO, USALAMA, MDINI, na kadhalika
 
Kwanza ukisema kwa makini utaona kwamba DPP kaandika notisi tokea Februari sita, 2007, kwa hiyo ni kabla hata ya Dito na kabla ya mahabusu kugoma
 
Prof. Mahalu earns reprieve from gaol on a technicality

PLASDUCE MBOSSA
Dar es Salaam
THIS DAY

TANZANIA'S former ambassador to Italy, Prof. Costa Ricky Mahalu, yesterday avoided going to remand prison on a technicality when a High Court judge in Dar es Salaam ruled that the scheduled review of his current bail status could not proceed until a separate constitutional case opened by his lawyers is determined.

Consequently, Presiding Judge Amir Mruma ordered a stay of the hearing of an application filed by the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to challenge the controversial bail granted by a lower court to Prof. Mahalu and Ms Grace Martin, his co-accused in their high-profile, multi-billion-shilling embezzlement case.

Judge Mruma ruled that the DPP's application opposing the duo's bail cannot be allowed to proceed, pending determination of the constitutional case filed by Prof. Mahalu's legal defence team, under Miscellaneous Application Number 35 before the same court, seeking to strike out a section of law allowing the DPP to object to such bail.

Prof. Mahalu and Ms Martin are facing charges of conspiracy, theft, fraud and deceit in relation to the 2002 purchase of the Tanzania embassy building in Rome, Italy, which is reported to have been bought for an actual price that was more than two million euros (approx. 3bn/-) below the quoted price.

It is alleged that the accused duo, in their capacities as ambassador and embassy counsellor respectively at the time, forged documents including payment vouchers and sales contracts with the intention of cheating their employer (the government) into believing that the purchase price of the embassy building was 3,098,741.58 euros instead of the actual 1,032,913.98 euros; thus pocketing the difference of 2,065,827.60 euros between them.

According to the state prosecutors in the case, these actions amounted to violation of both the Prevention of Corruption Act and the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act.

When first arraigned before the Kisutu Resident Magistrate's Court in Dar es Salaam on January 22 this year, the duo along with a third accused Stewart Prosper (who has since been acquitted) were granted bail with sureties amounting to a total of just 30m/-

But in its application for the High Court to review these bail conditions, the DPP's office sought to point out that since the case falls under the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act, one condition should have required the accused to deposit at least half of the money they are alleged to have stolen. This would amount to at least 1.5bn/-

In response, Prof. Mahalu's defence team led by advocate Alex Mgongolwa filed a new case on the premise that section 36 (4) (e) of the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act (ECOCCA), chapter 200 'which was also used to file the DPP's application against Mahalu' is not in line with the national constitution because it offends the principle of presumption of innocence.

It was argued that the condition stated in the legislation, requiring an accused person to deposit with the court at least half of the money value of whatever property is involved in the case, and execute a bond for the remaining sum, is construed to mean that the accused person did steal the money or property, and is therefore guilty.

According to the defence team, the said condition therefore goes against article 13 of the national constitution, which provides for presumption of innocence until one is proved guilty.

In his ruling yesterday, Justice Mruma agreed with the argument raised by Prof. Mahalu's lawyers that the national constitution is the supreme law of the land and all other legislation is secondary, which makes it important that the constitutional case be fully determined before other matters.

The learned judge also said that as the amount of money in Prof. Mahalu's case is very huge, it is likely the accused persons will not be able to abide by the condition that they bring half of it to court if asked to do so.

The DPP's representative in the case, Prosecuting State Attorney Gerson Mdemu, had earlier argued in court that should the court decide to declare section 36 (4) (e) of the Economic and Organized Crimes Control Act (ECOCCA) unconstitutional and therefore invalid, a speedy conclusion to the main case would become unlikely.

Quoting section 13 (2) of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act, Mdemu said such a move by the High Court would leave the work to amend or repeal the section to the legislature, which may not act in the near future.

He said since the court is not in a position to legislate, all the remaining work would have to be done by the parliament, during which time the law remains in operation. The state attorney further argued that section 36 (4) (e) of the ECOCCA is not discriminatory as claimed by Prof. Mahalu's counsels.
 
TAKUKURU yamuita Mahalu, na Happiness Katabazi
Tanzania Daima

TAASISI ya Kuzuia na Kupambana na Rushwa (TAKUKURU) imewapa siku saba aliyekuwa Balozi wa Tanzania nchini Italia, Costa Mahalu na Grace Martin, wanaokabiliwa na kesi ya kuhujumu uchumi, kuorodhesha mali zao, Tanzania Daima imegundua.

Uamuzi huo wa TAKUKURU umekuja katika kipindi cha wiki mbili sasa tangu Mahakama Kuu itoe amri ya kusitishwa usikilizwaji wa ombi la Mkurugenzi wa Mashitaka (DPP), Eliezer Feleshi, linalotaka kupitiwa upya kwa dhamana ya Professa Mahalu na mtuhumiwa mwenzake.

DPP katika ombi lake hilo aliiomba Mahakama Kuu ipitie upya dhamana ya Balozi Mahalu iliyotolewa katika Mahakama ya Kisutu mapema mwaka huu.

Vyanzo vya habari vya kuaminika vimeiambia Tanzania Daima kuwa Mahalu alipigiwa simu kuhusu suala hilo Jumatatu na akatakiwa afike ofisini hapo siku iliyofuata kwa ajili ya kukabidhiwa hati ya kuorodhesha mali zake.

Habari zaidi zinadai kwamba, Balozi Mahalu na Grace Martin wanaokabiliwa na kesi hiyo ya uhujumu uchumi, waliitikia wito huo na Jumanne saa 4:30 walifika ofisini hapo na kupokewa na ofisa mmoja wa taasisi hiyo (jina linahifadhiwa), ambaye aliwaingiza kwenye chumba mahususi kwa mashauriano.

Kwa mujibu wa habari hizo, Mahalu na mwenzake waliokuwa wameongozana na mawakili wao, walitakiwa kufanya hivyo baada ya kuwapo kwa taarifa kuwa wamejilimbikizia mali.

Katika mazungumzo hayo yaliyodumu kwa dakika takriban 20, Mahalu na Grace walikuwa wameongozana na mawakili wao, Bob Makani (anayemtetea Mahalu) na Cuthbert Tenga, anayemtetea Grace.

Mara baada ya mazungumzo hayo, watuhumiwa walipewa fomu maalumu za kujaza ambazo walikuwa wakitakiwa kuzirejesha ndani ya siku saba.

Hata hivyo habari zaidi zinaeleza kwamba, katika mazungumzo yao hayo, walielezwa kuwa, hati hiyo ya kutaka watuhumiwa waorodheshe mali walizonazo haina uhusiano wa kesi ya msingi iliyopo katika Mahakama ya Hakimu Mkazi Kisutu.

Mahalu ambaye alilithibitishia gazeti hili kuhusu kuitwa kwake TAKUKURU na kukabidhiwa hati hiyo ya maelezo, alimwelekeza mwandishi kuwasiliana na mawakili wake kwa taarifa zaidi.

Mmoja wa mawakili wake, Alex Mgongolwa, aliithibitishia Tanzania Daima kuhusu kuitwa kwa mteja wake na akaeleza kushangazwa kwake na hatua hiyo.

Kwa mujibu wa Mgongolwa, kitendo hicho cha TAKUKURU kinakwenda kinyume cha sheria kwa kuwa kesi ya msingi inayomkabili mtuhumiwa wake ingali ipo mahakamani na ilikuwa ianze kusikilizwa leo.

"Nasema kitendo cha TAKUKURU kumuita Mahalu wakati kesi ya msingi inaanza kusikilizwa mahakamani ni ukiukwaji wa sheria, kwani taasisi hiyo ilipaswa kuorodhesha mali za mteja wake mapema kabla ya kumfungulia kesi ya msingi inayomkabili, ambayo imepangwa kuanza usikilizwaji wake kesho (leo)," alisema Mgongolwa.

Mei 20 mwaka huu, Jaji Amir Mruma, alitoa uamuzi wa kusimamisha usikilizwaji wa ombi la DPP kwa kuwa alikubaliana na hoja na vigezo vilivyotolewa na jopo la mawakili wanaomtetea mwombaji (Mahalu), ambao waliiomba mahakama hiyo iangalie vigezo vitatu vya kusitisha au kutokusitisha kusikiliza ombi la DPP.

Uamuzi huo wa Jaji Mruma ulikuja baada ya kuwapo kwa kesi nyingine ya kikatiba iliyofunguliwa na Mahalu mahakamani hapo, Mei mwaka huu, aliyekuwa akipinga Sheria ya Uhujumu Uchumi kwa maelezo kuwa inakwenda kinyume cha Katiba.

Mbele ya Jaji Mruma, mawakili hao wa Mahalu na Grace waliiomba mahakama kulitupa ombi la DPP kwani kuendelea kulisikiliza, kunaweza kukaathiri kesi ya Katiba iliyofunguliwa na mteja wao.

Mawakili hao waliiomba mahakama kuangalia mizania ya nani ataathirika zaidi katika pande hizo mbili na hivyo kuathiri haki za mshitakiwa kabla ya kesi ya kikatiba iliyofunguliwa (na Mahalu) haijaamuliwa.

Sambamba na vigezo hivyo, mawakili hao waliiomba mahakama hiyo isitishe usikilizwaji wa ombi la DDP ambalo lilitaka sheria ya uhujumu uchumi itumike katika kufikia maamuzi ya dhamana dhidi ya Profesa Mahalu na mwenzake.

Chini ya sheria hiyo ya uhujumu uchumi, mtuhumiwa anatakiwa kutoa kama dhamana, fedha taslimu, ambazo ni sawa na nusu ya fedha anazotuhumiwa kuiba, jambo ambalo Mgongolwa alisema ni kinyume cha Katiba ya nchi, inayosema dhamana ni haki ya kila mtu na inapiga marufuku mtuhumiwa kutochukuliwa kuwa ni mkosaji, hadi mahakama itakapomtia hatiani.

Jaji Mruma alisema mahakama ilipitia kwa kina vigezo hivyo na kuona kwamba Profesa Mahalu ataathirika endapo sheria hiyo ya uhujumu uchumi itatumika dhidi yake na kuongeza kuwa, tangu kesi hiyo ianze, mshitakiwa amekuwa akifika mahakamani bila kukosa.

"Katiba ni sheria mama ya nchi, kwa maana hiyo, hakupaswi kuwepo na sheria nyingine inayopingana na Katiba na kwa sababu hiyo basi, natoa amri ya kusitishwa usikilizaji wa ombi la DPP hadi kesi ya kikatiba iliyofunguliwa na mwombaji itakaposikilizwa na kutolewa maamuzi," alisema Jaji Mruma.

Aliongeza kuwa, endapo kesi ya DDP ikiendelea kusikilizwa, inaweza kuathiri haki za msingi za mshitakiwa. Mei mwaka huu, Profesa Mahalu alifungua kesi ya kikatiba ya kupinga sheria ya uhujumu uchumi, akidai kuwa, inakwenda kinyume cha Katiba ya nchi na muda mfupi baada ya kufungua kesi hiyo, aliwasilisha ombi la kuiomba mahakama hiyo itoe amri ya kusitisha usikilizwaji wa kesi ya DPP.
 
Kesi ya Prof. Mahalu inaendelea, tafadhali soma yafuatayo:

Mahalu's trial illegal -- Defence

FAUSTINE KAPAMA
Daily News On Saturday; Saturday,October 06, 2007 @00:01

A Dar es Salaam court was yesterday asked to dismiss the 2bn/- economic sabotage case facing former Tanzanian ambassador to Italy Costa Mahalu on grounds that there was no complainant.

Defence counsel led by Alex Mgongolwa submitted before the Kisutu Resident Magistrate's Court that Mahalu and Grace Martin were being tried illegally.

Mr Mgongolwa said a criminal charge could only be instituted by a statement of a complainant, who initiates criminal proceedings against the accused.

"In the absence of such a complainant, the court will have no option, but to dismiss the case and set free the accused forthwith," the advocate submitted.

His request came after the prosecution told the court that there was no complainant in the case.

"What is the legal consequence where there is no complainant?

"The answer is simple as held in many decisions of higher courts in criminal cases -- it is to dismiss the case forthwith," the advocate told the court presided by Principal Resident Magistrate Sivangilwa Mwangesi.


Preventing and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) official Abubakar Msangi, for prosecution, told the court that they have decided to conceal identity of witnesses to protect them from being killed or harmed. The defence strongly objected the submission.

Others in the defence team are advocates Cuthbert Tenga, Bob Makani, Segondo Mvungi and Gabriel Mnyere.

The defence maintained that the prosecution has duty to provide security of witnesses, supply statements to the accused so that they could understand the nature of the charges and evidence to enable them prepare the defence.

They also asked the court to warn and prohibit the prosecution from summoning their clients to their offices at the PCCB's head office for further interrogations without seeking permission of the court.

They were reacting to a recent PCCB's decision to call Mahalu and Martin to their offices to account for their property.

Mr Msangi, however, maintained that the law permitted them to do what they did.

Magistrate Mwangesi said he would deliver his ruling on October 17.

Mahalu and Martin are alleged to have conspired with other people in Italy, Tanzania and other places to steal from the government 2,065, 827/60 Euros.
Click to expand...

Source link: Daily News.

Naona defence team inazidi kujidhatiti... je, kuna mema kweli hapa? nahisi hizo bilioni zimeanza kutumika ipasavyo sasa...!!

SteveD.
 
Huyu Gabriel Mnyere si ndiye aliua mke wake?

Imekuwaje yuko nje anapeta kama kawaida? Hivi huyu kweli anafaa hata kuendelea kuwa wakili?
 
hivi serikali inaposema :

Preventing and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) official Abubakar Msangi, for prosecution, told the court that they have decided to conceal identity of witnesses to protect them from being killed or harmed. The defence strongly objected the submission.
Click to expand...

Halafu wanataka hawa wengine ndio waende mahakamani, wakati wao wenyewe mashahidi wao wanawaficha?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Back
Top Bottom
Forums
New posts
Post thread
Back