Ombudsman appeals Tractorgate ruling: Seeks relief at Supreme Court of Malawi
The office of the Ombudsman has filed 10 grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal seeking to overturn the wholeruling by the High Court which made the office and its operations redundant following a controversial unpalatable Tractorgate scandal report which the office produced.
According to a notice of appeal filed at the Supreme Court of Appeal on Friday, copies seen by the Nyasa Times, the Ombudsman argued that the High Court judgement deliberately ignored the weight of evidence presented in both the report and the court.
“The High Court erred in law by failing to appreciate the distinctive mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman which is to investigate and inquire as compared to the adjudicative mandate of the courts.
“As a consequence, the Court failed to appreciate the nature of the remedial action in the context of the totality of the report,” reads part of the notice filed private Lawyers Nyirenda and Msisha.
The infamous ‘Tractorgate’ scandal revolves around the government’s decision in 2014 to sell off 177 tractors and 144 maize shellers intended as drought relief for small farmers to civil servants for a song.
The tractors, purchased for R740 000 each, were sold for R100 000 each, raising a paltry R12-million. The scam was allegedly disguised as a routine public auction of government equipment.
Last month High Court Judge Fiona Mwale in Lilongwe declared as and null and void the Ombudsman report on the infamous “Tractorgate” scandal consequently sending murmurs of jubilation at Capital Hill, the seat of the Malawi government.
The Ombudsman report titled “The Present Toiling, The Future Overburdened”, which cited nine instances of gross maladministration by government officials, among other key recommendations, called for the crackdown on state procurement chiefs implicated in scandal .
“The High Courterred in failing to find and uphold the determination of the Ombudsman that there was in fact no other remedy reasonably available to the complainants as demonstrated by contents of the report.
“It also erred in holding that the question of adequacy or sufficiency of remedy was not to be debated in the Ombudsman’s determining whether or not there was a remedy reasonably available, and whether or not to undertake an investigation,” the Ombudsman notice reads.
The Ombudsman report released in October 2016, sent seismic waves in the corridors of government, promoting the government to move with haste to file for a stay order to stop the implementation of key recommendations and pushed for a judicial review, which was largely seen as a desperate attempt to shield the named culprits.
Mwale said the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction on the matter arguing that the complainants should have gone to Courts.
The Tractorgate investigation was carried out in response to two complaints lodged between April and May 2016. The first complainant was MP Juliana Lunguzi and the second was a smallholder farmer.
The MP complained about processes on acquisition and disposal of the farm machinery. The farmer complained about accessibility of the farm machinery.
“The High Court erred in holding that the Ombudsman had no jurisdiction to undertake the investigation and in quashing the remedial orders and actions on that basis. It also erred in adopting a construction of section 123 of the Constitution which renders the office of the Ombudsman redundant.
The High Court erred in construing section 123 of the Constitution by failing to recognize and uphold the discretion of the Ombudsman to determine whether there is a “remedy reasonably available” to a complaint in deciding if an investigation should be undertaken,” the office said.
Judge Mwale’s verdict meant state procurement chiefs who were implicated in the country’s multibillion-kwacha scandal and faced prosecutions and job losses heaved sighs of relief.
The tractors and shellers were part of a $50-million (R695-million) development scheme known as the Green Belt Initiative, which was set up to buffer millions of peasant farmers from drought.
Funded by a loan from the Export-Import Bank of India (Exim Bank), the scheme sought to put about a million hectares of farmland under irrigation and improve food security for peasant farmers, who make up 70% of Malawi’s population.
- The Centre for Investigative Journalism Malawi (CIJM) supported this story – http://www.investigative-malawi.com
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
Kodi ameneyi wasowa zochita.? This case shows the power fights among women lawyers in Malawi. You just have to look at the fight between Fiona Mwale and Martha Mwangonde; between Janet Banda and Mary Kachale; etc
FIONA MWALE nde mutu wa container tsopano.
ya madonna very confusing. cheap politics akakhala mmalawi kumuvina cikudzukudzu if want to adopt. now comes nzungu mobisala within 2 weeks deal done. a week before the rumour madona anati sakuzapanga adopt. aweek later she whiskes twins.-kodi ndi zizukulu za a judge zija. taikani malamulo oti nafeso tiziwaziwaso kaya.
TOTAL PACKS OF ABUSE OF TRUST
Waste of resources. What is this Ombuds Woman trying to achieve? She is better off joining civil society where even the dumbest find their voice. If I were the Ombuds Woman, I would have left Activism to my husband Reinford Mwangonde or the mathanyula kings – Gift Trapence, Chancy Mtambo and Billy Mayaya.
Are you a Malawian?? the Ombudsman is mandated to defend our rights and democracy at all costs. i wish you could have read the judgement by Justice Mwale, she made the office of the Ombudsman redundant or useless. Is Parliament stupid enough for creating this office??
That’s the way to go. The ruling is detrimental to democratic governance and existence of the Office of the Ombudsman in Malawi. Surely the Supreme Court of Appeal will clarify the issue.
Games of the privileged!