….ZINWA humiliated in court as state failed to produce critical evidence
By Meditation Mposi
Prominent Masvingo Businessman Philemon Mutangiri who owns Riverton Academy was on February 7, 2024 acquitted by a Masvingo Magistrate after he had been arraigned for possessing three dams without permits and denying authorities access into his Riverton Farm
Mutangiri who was represented by Tabana and Marwa Legal Practitioners from Harare pleaded not guilty when he appeared before Magistrate Franklin Mkwananzi and was acquitted on both charges.
It was the State’s case as presented by Prosecutor Ruvimbo Makoni that on October 24, 2024 Zimbabwe National Water Authority (ZINWA) River Inspector Tungamirai Chireshe went to Riverton Farm where Chiredzi River starts for an inspection and was allegedly denied access by Mutangiri.
He went back to work and reported what had happened and the matter was reported to the police. The officials from ZINWA were then given police officers to accompany them to Riverton farm. Upon their arrival at the farm Mutangiri directed them through the farm.
Chireshe noticed an old dam and two newly constructed ones and asked for a permit which Mutangiri failed to produce. He therefore concluded that Mutangiri constructed the dams without the required design and failed to acquire permits.
In his defense, Mutangiri through his lawyers said he was not the one who constructed the dams but just inherited them from the previous owner.
Chireshe failed to present his credentials to the court to show that he was truly a river inspector or even provide a letter from ZINWA after being challenged to do so in court.
He failed to find the coordinates of the farm on the map which was presented as exhibit one and was asked on how one could have permits for things that do not exist.
The map was drawn in 1980 and it belonged to Penhalonga in Manicaland so the map could not give enough evidence on existence of the dams in Mutangiri’s farm.
The state also failed to call an eye witness who was present during the construction of the dams. None of the witnesses visited Riverton Farm prior to October 24, 2024 to prove that before the dams never existed.
In passing judgment, the magistrate said the Water Act states that a person who construct a dam is the one who is supposed to approach civil engineers for design.
He said the statute goes to whoever constructed the dams and the demands were upon the constructor, not the person who found them already constructed and the witnesses failed to provide their credentials.
“The state failed to elaborate whether the accused inherited the dams or he constructed them. Also, the credentials of the witnesses were not well explained therefore, their evidence could not be relied upon to say whether he had skills as a river inspector or not,” said Mkwananzi.
The important information which the court wanted to hear was who exactly built the dams and when.
“The witnesses rubbished the idea of who constructed the dams and this was the entry level. Defence did not deny the existence of the dams and the question was who built the dams and why. Second witness was a Security Officer and his evidence could not carry much weight.
“On the second count of the authority being denied access into the farm, it was just a conversation between two people, the witness and the accused. The lawyer silenced the witness on the phone records and the court was not even favored with the accused’s phone number,” said Mkwananzi.
