Judgement of TPA director in January

FAUSTINE KAPAMA

THE outcome of the trial of former Director General with Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA), Ephraim Mgawe and his Deputy, Hamadi Koshuma, who are facing abuse of positions charges over 1tr/-construction deal, will be known on January 6, next year.

Principal Resident Magistrate Cyprian Mkeha, who is hearing the case at the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in Dar es Salaam, was yesterday scheduled to deliver the court’s judgment, but pushed forward the session to early next year because it was not yet ready.

The parties, prosecution and defence, were told that the trial magistrate had not completed preparing the judgment in question as he was attending other judicial matters, including handling cases in a special session.

Charges against the ex- TPA officials relate to expansion of the Dar es Salaam Port, in particular construction of Berths Number 13 and 14 under a contract involving a Chinese firm, China Communications Construction Company Limited (CCCCL), which cost about 523 million US dollars.

The prosecution is alleging that Mgawe together with his assistant director (Hamadi Koshuma) signed a commercial contract between the TPA and the CCCCL for construction of berths number 13 and 14 at the Dar es Salaam Port without invitation of tenders.

Such an act, the prosecution further claims, was in violation of the provisions of Section 31 of the Public Procurement Act, No. 21 of 2004 and was intended to obtain an undue advantage for the Chinese construction company.

It was alleged that the two former bosses of TPA committed the offence on December 5, 2011 at the Tanzania Ports Authority, within the City. While hearing the prosecution’s case, Senior State Attorney Pius Hila, called five witnesses in attempt to prove the charges against the accused persons.

On April 22, this year, the court found the accused persons with a case to answer, after the prosecution managed to establish a prima facie case requiring them to make their defence in respect of the charges.

In one of his defence testimonies, Mgawe had told the court that the contract he had signed had nothing to do with procurement matters, thus, he never violated any Procurement Act, as alleged by the prosecution.

Led by his advocate Frank Mwalongo, the former TPA boss narrated that the Procurement Act governs procurement of goods and services and not commercial contracts as what they had signed with the Chinese company.

Asked as to why they had signed the contract with the China Communications Construction Company Limited, Mgawe told the court that it was the same company which had done the feasibility study for the expansion works and that it was the requirement of the bank that had agreed to finance the project.

He explained further that the contract they had signed had nothing to do with the construction works, because at the time there was no money and, therefore, it could not be possible for them to have such contract in place.

Mgawe further told the court that the contract for the extension works of the port ended at the stage of feasibility study alone and no loan was obtained from China Exim Bank thereafter, as earlier promised for the purposes intended.

“Therefore, I have not breached the Procurement Act. I signed the commercial contract as per requirements of getting the loan and also to enable the government to get such funds,” the ex-TPA chief said.

Cross-examined by advocate for Koshuma, the former Authority’s boss informed the court that his assistant had signed the contract in question as a witness and that no any loss was occasioned at the TPA for them to sign the contract.

He concluded that the process relating to the signing of the contract had involved several officials from the then Ministry of Transport, but none of them were brought before the court for arraignment.