Kashfa ya wizi wa BILIONI 400: Maoni ya Mh Zitto Kabwe

[LEX STEELE]

Mwanaidi sidhani kama anahusika na hiibya IPTL nadhani yeye alihusika kwenye negotiations za Richmond..kama sijakosea.

 

[Rohombaya]

ZITTO anashangaa hizo fedha zilikokwenda wakati yeye mwenyewe ni mmoja wa waliopewa fedha hizo, kama alipewa na CCM 3,600,000,000/= ili afanye kazi kuiangamiza CHADEMA kwa mawazo yake anafikiri CCM walitoa wapi hizo fedha? na pia anatakiwa atambua fedha hizo bado pia zitatumika katika kukijenga chama chake cha ACT kwa hiyo akae kimya asifikiri sisi Watanzania ni wajinga kiasi hiki hakuna mwenye imani na ZITTO tena ndani ya nchi hii labda wazazi wake na ile misukule yake.

Khaa!! ZZK haumuwezi.Mtabwabwaja sana bila ya kiwa na hoja wala details kama walevi. Na bado lazima mtajibeba

 

[Mipangomingi]

So, Senior Legal Expert anayetajwa kwenye hii story ni huyo mama ambaye picha yake inapamba hili bandiko (Sinare)? Yaani hawa wanafaidi sana hii nchi. Ukiona anazungumza kupinga hili deal, ujue lilimpita pembeni na hivyo ana chuki/hasira. Huyu mama na ndugu yake Hawa Sinare wamehusika kwenye mambo mengi sana yaliyojaa ukakasi. Wanasheria wengi wana tabia zinazofanana na kwa uzoefu wangu, hawana huruma na hii nchi. Hata huu wizi unaozungumzwa hapa utakuwa umewezeshwa na mwanasheria. Mmoja katajwa na Bw. Singh anaitwa Bw. Joseph Mkandege (Company Secretary). Kama taifa tufike mahali watu kama hawa wanapotezwa. Yaani wageni wanakuja hapa, hawa wanasheria wetu kazi yao ni kuwaonesha namna ya kutuibia. Naweza kusema hii ni taaluma (legal profession) iliyowaletea Watanzania matatizo mengi na makubwa kuliko taaluma nyingine yeyote.

Wanasheria ni watu niliowatoa thamani zamani sana. Kila nikikutana nao huwa nawaambia nyie ndiyo problem namba moja ktk nchi hii. Mtizamo wangu ulipata nguvu hasa pale nilipoisoma Richmond, ndio nimeapa kamwe sitachagua/kuteau mwanasheria yyte nikitokea kuoata nafasi ya kufanya hivyo katika maisha yangu. Wapuuzi sana hawa watu

 

[Mipangomingi]

zitto muongo simwamini tena...usikute kasha apishwa..

Wewe endelea na zittofobia yako tu, baadaye utakuja kujiona namna mlivyokuwa mjinga wa kuaminishwa vitu kwa malengo ya kisiasa

 

[Fentu]

Serikali yetu kweli ipo kwa ajili ya Wananchi wake wote? au ni kwa ajili ya wachache wanaotutawala huku hata siyo kuongozwa

 

[AL SHARPTON]

Mapya IPTL: $250m zimetokaje BoT ?

Nimesoma habari kuu ya gazeti la The Citizen la tarehe 3 Machi 2014 kuhusu mauzo ya kampuni ya IPTL kwa kampuni ya Pan Africa Power Limited ($270m deal: Story of IPTL, PAP and High Court - National - thecitizen.co.tz). Nimeshtushwa sana na matumizi ya fedha za akiba maalumu (escrow account) iliyokuwa benki kuu (BoT). Nikiwa mwenyekiti wa kamati ya PAC nina haya ya kusema;




Mwaka 2006 Rais Jakaya Kikwete aliagiza kwamba, ili kumaliza kabisa suala la mkataba wa kuuziana Umeme wa IPTL, mitambo ya kampuni hiyo ichukuliwe na Serikali. Mwaka 2006, 2007 na 2008 Kamati ya BUNGE ya Nishati na madini imekuwa ikitoa maagizo hayo hayo kuhusu suala la IPTL.



Mwaka 2009, Aprili 30 Kamati ya Bunge ya POAC ilipeleka mapendekezo bungeni kwamba IPTL ichukuliwe na serikali na fedha zilizopo katika escrow account zitumike pia kubadili mtambo ule kutoka mafuta mazito kwenda kutumia Gesi Asilia. Pendekezo hilo lilipitishwa na Bunge na POAC ikatoa maelekezo maalumu kwa Gavana wa Benki Kuu kuwa fedha zilizopo escrow account zisitumike kwa namna yeyote ile bila mitambo ya IPTL kuwa ya umma na kubadilishwa ili itumie Gesi Asilia.



Chanzo cha escrow account?


Baada ya mkataba wa IPTL kuingiwa, iligundulika kuwa kuna udanganyifu mkubwa ulifanyika katika kiwango cha mtaji wa kampuni hiyo na hivyo kufanya malipo wanayolipa tanesco kwa IPTL kuwa makubwa mno. Wakati katika kukokotoa gharama za uwekezaji (capacity charges) mtaji uliowekezwa katika IPTL ulisemwa ni dola milioni 36, ukweli ni kwamba IPTL waliweka dola 50 tu. Hivyo capacity charge ya dola milioni 3 kwa mwezi haikupaswa kulipwa yote kwani kampuni iliendeshwa kwa mkopo kuliko mtaji wa wawekezaji ( debt financed and not equity financed). Hivyo, mahakama ya kimataifa ya ICSID ikaamua kuwa, fedha zote za capacity charges ziwekwe Benki Kuu mpaka gharama halisi ziamuliwe na mahakama ndio wahusika wagawane (tanesco na IPTL). Akiba hiyo, nimeambiwa, ilifika dola 250m kabla ya kuchukuliwa na kugawanywa kwa wanahisa na wanunuzi wa IPTL. Hivyo kabla ya mgawo huu ilipaswa pesa ambazo tanesco walikuwa wanalipa kama ziada ya capacity charges kwa IPTL zirejeshwe kwanza na zinazobakia ndio zilipwe kwa wadai (creditors) na wanahisa.



Kwa hali ilivyo sasa mnunuzi wa IPTL kapewa mitambo na fedha za kuinunua, ikiwemo fedha za tanesco ambazo zilipaswa kurejeshwa (Richmond cha mtoto kwa kweli).


Maswali ya kujibiwa ni haya;


Je, ziada ya fedha za malipo ya capacity charges zimerudi tanesco?


Je, mwekezaji Mpya kapewa mkataba Mpya wa kuuza Umeme (PPA) kwa utaratibu gani wa zabuni?


Je, agizo la Rais na BUNGE kwamba Mitambo iwe ya umma limetupiliwa mbali kwa vigezo gani?


Wizara ya Nishati na Madini na Benki Kuu wametoa taarifa rasmi kwa umma kuhusu masuala haya?


​

Wizara itoe taarifa, CAG akague

Kwa namna yeyote ile CAG anapaswa kukagua mchakato huu na kuweka majibu kwa umma kupitia kamati ya PAC. Hii ndio njia bora zaidi ya kuondoa wingu katika suala la IPTL ambalo toka limeanza miaka ya tisini limegubikwa na mazongezonge ya rushwa na uvundo wa kifisadi. Uwazi utatoa ukweli na kuwezesha uwajibikaji wa fedha za umma. Wakati mchakato wa ukaguzi unafanyika ni vema Wizara ya Nishati na madini itoe tamko rasmi.

​

Zingatia:

Kwa mujibu wa mkataba kati ya TANESCO na IPTL capacity charge inapaswa kukokotolewa kwa kuzingatia mtaji wa asilimia 30 na mkopo wa asilimia 22.31. Mtaji wa IPTL ulikuwa $50 tu, tofauti na $36 milioni zilizotajwa kwenye mkataba na kuamuliwa na mahakama. Badala ya TANESCO kulipa 'capacity charge' ya dola 50,000 kila siku Umeme uzalishwe au la, udanganyifu wa mtaji ulipelekea TANESCO kuwa inalipa dola 100,000 kila siku tangu mwaka 2002. Kuanzia mwaka 2007 fedha hizo zilianza kuwekwa kwenye akaunti maalum (escrow account) BoT.

https://www.facebook.com/zittokabwe/posts/713905138630186

​

[h=1]$270m deal: Story of IPTL, PAP and High Court[/h]IN SUMMARY

• At the centre of the debate is how IPTL, a once liquidated company, became the assignee that assigned its shares to Pan Africa Power (PAP), which then used Escrow monies to buy the former’s power plants at Tegeta suburb.

The acquisition of the Independent Power Tanzania Ltd (IPTL) facilities has caused anxiety and raised questions in legal and government circles—with some analysts likening it with the $131 million External Payments Arrears (EPA) mind-boggling scam.
The deal took place at the time when two different court battles in Dar es Salaam and Washington— about Tanesco’s $270million— involving the liquidated IPTL, the company that has dominated the country’s energy sector for 19 years.
The deal, which has been financed in part by $270 million from Escrow account, opened at the Bank of Tanzania (BoT) some years ago and is being queried and some legal experts punching holes in the manner it was sealed.
IPTL claimed that it invested about $165 million to establish power generating plants located at Tegeta in the 1990s.
At the centre of the debate is how IPTL, a once-liquidated company, become the assignee, and assigned its shares to Pan Africa Power (PAP), The Citizen has established.
Senior legal experts who spoke to The Citizen questioned how a liquidated company was able to transfer its shares to third party, PAP. One asked: “How could a dead person (IPTL) assign another company to undertake its business?”
According to the two-month investigation conducted by this paper, another issue that has confounds legal fraternity and some quarters in government is how the money deposited into the Escrow account at the BoT was withdrawn and used in the IPTL-PAP transaction.
Escrow account is a financial instrument held by a third party on behalf of the other two parties in a transaction. The funds are held by the escrow service until it receives the appropriate written or oral instructions or until obligations have been fulfilled. Securities, funds and other assets can be held in escrow.

Background​

In 1995, Tanesco and IPTL entered into the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) in which the latter agreed to design, construct, own, operate and maintain an electricity generating facility in Tanzania.
An original dispute in 1998 between Tanesco and IPTL was settled by an International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) tribunal in the case of Tanesco vs IPTL— ICSID Case No. ARB/98/8, which rendered an award on July 12, 2001 whereby the parties to that arbitration had further agreed on a financial model to be applied to calculate tariffs under the PAP. Following the award, Tanesco continues to pay capacity charges and other levies until January 2007, when it discovered that it has been overcharged by IPTL—a move that forced the State-owned power utility to open a court
battle.

Tanesco questioned the legality of the calculation of the capacity payments in June, 2004 and since then it has been a one step forward, but two steps back for the state power utility in its bid to fight the battle with IPTL.
As the two parties continue with the legal tussle in Washington and Dar es Salaam, it was then agreed that an Escrow account be opened at the BoT—and Tanesco deposited all payments mean for IPTL pending the determination of the main civil cause in USA.
Some of the key conditions for this Escrow account were that if Tanesco wins the case, it would be refunded the extra payments it has made, after an appropriate calculation agreed by both parties under the auspices of the ICSID tribunal.
If Tanesco lost the case, then the monies banked at BoT’s Escrow account would go to IPTL.
On February 14, this year, ICSID—the Washington based tribunal agreed with Tanesco’s claims about over-priced capacity charges and tariff, ordering the two parties to come up with a proper formula to calculate the tariff within next three months.
What transpired?
Reliable details obtained by The Citizen during our investigation show that by the end of last year, the account had about $270million as per the prevailing exchange rate because all payments made by Tanesco were in local currencies.
However, The Citizen couldn’t independently verify the actual figure of what was in the Escrow account because there was another report that the money had reached $250 million by the end of 2013.
The PAP purchased IPTL plants located at Tegeta by acquiring 70 per cent shares, which were previously held by Malaysian investors and 30 per cent stakes that belonged to a local company, VIP Engineering and Marketing.
The money used in this deal came from the very same amount banked at the BoT Escrow account, according to reliable sources.
This took place at the time when there was still another pending case between Tanesco, IPTL and Standard Chartered Bank—Hong Kong (SCB HK) at the ICSID tribunal in Washington.

In establishing an Escrow account, there are certain conditions that are agreed upon by both parties including accessibility to the funds, which requires consent from key concerned parties.
In this case, the two key parties to access the funds at BoT were supposed to be IPTL and Tanesco. But, since IPTL was under provisional liquidator, it is not clear who represented it in the deal to acquire the Tegeta power plants.
Another burning issue was the SCB HK, which sued Tanesco at ICSID, Washington, in its bid to recover the loan it advanced to IPTL during the purchase of the power plants.
On February 14, this year, ICSID ruled: “The present case, SCB HK is entitled to recover the tariff payments due during the period when the plant was being operated by the provisional liquidator, which will include capacity charges and bonus payments, less the amount that covered the operation and maintenance of the plant that comprised expenses that were not incurred by IPTL. Contacted for comments, a senior Dar es Salaam lawyer who is familiar with the case since he has been representing one of the parties, said the whole transaction involving transfer of IPTL shares to PAP has serious legal ramifications that raise many questions.
“To best of my knowledge,” he said, “the IPTL was under a provisional liquidator, Registration Insolvency and Trusteeship Agency(RITA), so, how can another firm buy all its assets using the very same revenues which were in escrow account under the court order?”
According to the senior counsel who declined to be named since the matter at ICSID, in Washington, was ruled in favour of Tanesco in February, this year, then whoever has assumed the rights of IPTL without notifying the ICSID is likely to lose the money in Escrow account.
Dillydallying, brief response from key players
To get the inside story of what really transpired at the corridors of justice in between September 2013 and January, 2014 that led to monies being withdrawn from Escrow account, The Citizen contacted some key players in this deal. However, besides dillydallying, their responses were brief.

On Thursday, January 30, 2014, the BoT Governor, Prof Benno Ndulu, said: “I think it is better to talk to authorities concerned —Tanesco and the ministry (of Energy and Minerals). I don’t want to be accused of speaking beyond my authority. I think you are aware about a court case on the issue.”

On Friday, January 31, 2014, the Tanesco managing director, Mr Felschemi Mramba, said: “I cannot comment anything about it. The court has made a ruling that I cannot talk about.”

On Friday, February 07, 2014, the Attorney General, Judge (rtd) Frederick Werema, sent this paper an sms saying: “You can make an appointment so that you get to know the whole issue. I hope you have talked to IPTL shareholders and the new proprietors or their lawyers. This could help you.”
After asking for an appointment, Judge Werema sent another sms saying: “Come to see me after you have talked to shareholders, especially a Tanzanian, Mr James Rugemalira, who has sold his VIP shares.”
On Sunday, February 9, 2014, Mr James Rugemalira sent an sms saying: “Lucas, since 24th January 14 VIP transferred its 30% shares in IPTL to PAP (Pan Africa Power Solutions (Tanzania) Ltd. I advise you to contact Mr Singh (+255767xxxx) on all questions concerning IPTL. James. Cc. Dr Singh.” (Lucas is a reporter with The Citizen.)
On Tuesday, February 11, 2014, Mr Singh (PAP CEO) sent an sms to this reporter, saying: “Sir. Please contact Mr Joseph Makandege who is our company secretary. And spokesman for PAP +255767xxxx…I have travelled and will be away for 2 weeks for religious function. Thanks.”
On Friday, February 14, 2014, the PAP company secretary, Mr Makandege, promised to talk to The Citizen on February 15, 2014 but when the day came he could not pick this reporter’s several phone calls.
And on Tuesday, February 18, 2014, Mr Makandege availed his email address to this reporter saying all questions regarding this issue should be emailed to him, promising to answer them.
However, Mr Makandege cautioned that he would not hesitate taking legal action if there was any misreporting of the issue. He asked this reporter to get a copy of a court judgement delivered on September 5, 2013.
On Tuesday, February 18, 2014, Mr Makandege acknowledged receipt of the questions sent to him by email and promised to answer all the questions when time allowed as his schedule was tight.
However, until we went to press late yesterday, there hadn’t been any written response from Mr Makandege.
How high court blessed the deal

In Miscellaneous Civil Cause No 254 of 2003 between VIP Engineering and Marketing, IPTL (first and second applicants) versus PAP, BoT, Stanbic Bank Tanzania Ltd and Standard Chartered Bank Tanzania Ltd (as first, second, third and fourth respondents) ruled on January 8 that the first applicant and the first respondent have agreed to mediate this matter through the court’s assistance and upon mediation been conducted, the following were ordered by the court:
• The first applicant in this chamber application filed on January 8, this year, VIP Ltd and PAP, who are key parties in this matter have agreed to mediate the matter and that, this consent settlement order shall dispose of the whole application without involving the rest of the parties.
• That VIP hereby waives all claims related to contractual interests in respect of the contract (the contract) made between it and PAP on the August 15, 2013 and executed on August 19, the same year on sale and purchase of 30 percent VIP’s shares in IPTL to PAP.
• That PAP shall pay the balance of the contractual amount as purchase price of $67.5 million (109.14billion) to VIP Ltd before the end of January 20, 2014—twelve days after the order was issued.
• That PAP shall pay VIP the contractual amount by discounting the government of Tanzania Treasury Bills at the BoT payable to PAP or any other legal sources before January 24, this year.
• That VIP shall withdraw Wartsila Netherlands B. V. and Wartsila Tanzania Limited from Civil Case No. 229 of 2013 it filed before the High Court against the two companies and others so that the latter can assist PAP in converting IPTL into gas firing and expanding the IPTL plants into gas operated power generating plants with the capacity to produce 500 megawatts.
The Citizen has reliably established that the money used to pay VIP Ltd to wholly acquire IPTL plants came from the Escrow account established at the BoT.
“I have never seen something as controversial as this deal in my entire 25 years of legal practice…first of all the consent order was issued without involving other key parties.” Another lawyer who represent one of the parties told The Citizen under the conditions of anonymity last week.


SOURCE: THE CITIZEN

Cc Simiyu Yetu

 

[Fabian mswaki]

ZITTO anashangaa hizo fedha zilikokwenda wakati yeye mwenyewe ni mmoja wa waliopewa fedha hizo, kama alipewa na CCM 3,600,000,000/= ili afanye kazi kuiangamiza CHADEMA kwa mawazo yake anafikiri CCM walitoa wapi hizo fedha? na pia anatakiwa atambua fedha hizo bado pia zitatumika katika kukijenga chama chake cha ACT kwa hiyo akae kimya asifikiri sisi Watanzania ni wajinga kiasi hiki hakuna mwenye imani na ZITTO tena ndani ya nchi hii labda wazazi wake na ile misukule yake.

Wewe ndio unaiman na Zitto lakin wanaojua mchezo wa CDM wanaiman na Mh Zitto umesahau kuwa ata mwenyekit wenu pia alipewa!? Je unajua waliompa wametoa wapi? Acheni siasa za chuki na ubinafsi

 

[kidanha]

jaman tusiongee ushabiki tujadili ukweli me naona zito ni mnafiki kama PM wetu ushahidi huu hapa

PM wetu alilia alipoona report ya wanaoua albino bungeni na akaahid wakikamatwa wanyongwe mara wapewe adhab kali lakin walivyokamatwa alijifanya hajaskia habari yyte.

Zitto kasema ana uchungu na nchi hii leo anaenda uswisi kutafuta majina ya vigogo wanaoficha pesa uswisi aliporudi akawakabidhi haohao vigogo majina wajitangaze ukifikria kwa makini na kuondoa ushabiki zito alishachakachuliwa. Leo anaweza toa kauli hapo akifuatilia akawabaini waloiba hizo pesa hatowataja huo ni unafiki.

me nadhan asingestushwa na pesa ndogo hizo kinafik maana pesa alizozikuta uswis ni nyingi kuliko hizo hapo atuondolee uhalo hapa

 

[Saharavoice]

Wengi wanadhani CDM imewarudishia ufahamu, lakini kwa michango mingi ya pro Chadema humu inaonyesha CDM inawatia upofu na kuwaondolea ufahamu. Acheni kukiaibisha chama hata kwa mambo ambayo yako wazi.

Nimesoma vizuri toka mwanzo, sijaona mahali panapoonyesha ZZK ndiyo kaibua hii kashfa. ZZK kaisoma kwenye gazeti la The citizen, katoa ufafanuzi kama Mwenyekiti wa PAC, watu wanakurupuka kama kawaida yao kumshambulia.

Jadilini hoja iliyochapishwa kwenye gazeti la The Citizen siyo ZZK.

 

[Seaman]

Za uswiss vipi

 

[Mzee Wa Sumu]

mada zilipendwa hiyo

 

[LEX STEELE]

Pesa zilirudishwa