Sacked NDC bosses hint at witch-hunt

THE decision by the Namibia Development Corporation board to dismiss them appears to be a witch-hunt and lacks basis, an appeal by sacked NDC Managing Director Abdool Aboobakar and Finance Manager Addis Faul suggests.

The two are still awaiting a decision from a private lawyer on whether to grant them the right to appeal their dismissal, which came as a result of their role in investing N$55 million with the NDC’s sister company, the Offshore Development Company (ODC). The objectivity of the three-man disciplinary panel in assessing the evidence is now being called into question.Public pressure on the company to act against people involved in the ODC’s botched N$100 million investment is said to have played a role in the action against them.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul allege that the judgement of the panel that they be sacked, lacked supporting evidence.None of the five witnesses – mostly present and former NDC managers – asked to testify for the company at the disciplinary hearing pointed to any wrongdoing on the part of Aboobakar and Faul in investing the money.”The tribunal’s findings are primarily based on an unfair and selective consideration of portions of the total evidence mostly emphasising aspects of evidence against the employees in total disregard of evidence favouring the defence of the employees,” says lawyer Elia Shikongo, who has been defending the accused.”The effect of above approaches was that the Committee not only failed to apply its mind objectively towards the totality of evidence, but also actively built up a case based on inferences in its judgement upon which it found the employees guilty.”‘ODC INVESTMENT WAS NO SECRET’ Aboobakar and Faul were found guilty of gross negligence, poor performance and exceeding their powers.In addition, Aboobakar was also found guilty of dereliction of duty.Evidence suggests that the investments with the ODC were not made in secret and were discussed with other managers.The board had access to this information through company financial statements.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul say no evidence was presented to suggest that they acted negligently or overstepped their rights and duties.The disciplinary panel recommended their dismissal to the NDC board in March, which the NDC then endorsed.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul insist that the loss of the NDC’s investment rests with the ODC, as part of its N$100 million investment with dubious Botswana investment company Great Triangle Investment.They base this argument on a decision by the Ministry of Trade and Industry in July 2005, that as part of the divestiture process of the NDC, it should transfer all funds it was managing on behalf of special projects and industrial parks to the ODC for management.Most of the money invested with the ODC was intended for these projects and balances of the funds were offset against the investment and outstanding projects.A year earlier, the Ministry of Trade ordered that the ODC assume responsibilities regarding the investment projects of the NDC and an amount of N$78 million was transferred from the NDC to the ODC – this amount included the N$55 million investment.Further, Faul argues that the ODC guaranteed the NDC’s capital and interest when it invested with it.Acting NDC Managing Director Wessel Nanuseb said on Monday that it was still awaiting a ruling by an independent private lawyer on whether the pair have sufficient grounds to appeal the ruling.BID TO SHIFT SPOTLIGHT? Insiders say the sacking of Aboobakar and Faul was a move by the NDC board to shift the spotlight from itself and any blame it should shoulder for not having kept a closer watch on the company’s money.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul accuse the disciplinary panel of disregarding company policy, which according to their interpretation gives the Finance Manager the right to deal with investments without board approval.Shikongo argues that the finding of guilty on the gross negligence charge was mainly premised on the panel’s finding that no independent risk assessment of the investment with the ODC had been carried out by NDC employees.Shikongo says such a finding fails to take into account evidence that the risk of the investment rested with the ODC.It is the accused’s contention that as a result the need for an independent risk assessment was not necessary.Witnesses who testified during the disciplinary hearing [mostly other NDC managers] are said to have denied accusations that Aboobakar acted negligently in his involvement with the ODC investment.The tribunal is accused of ignoring evidence which suggested that the investment strategy had been followed.On charges that the pair withheld information from the board when it came to the investment with the ODC, the tribunal is accused of ignoring remarks by an external auditor of the company who confirmed – unchallenged – that not only did the company’s financial statements comply with normal reporting statements, but they disclosed more information than past financial statements.The additional financial statements for projects whose funds the NDC managed, in which investments are reflected, are also said to have been disregarded by the tribunal in its finding that the accused are alleged to have withheld information from the board.Shikongo further argues that his clients did not breach their employment contracts, the NDC Act or its investment policy and thus could not be accused of poor performance.Altogether 17 investment transactions were concluded with the ODC, all of which prescribed an investment period of three months.Besides the capital amount, the ODC also guaranteed interest of 19 per cent.The NDC board has not taken any action against the ODC for its missing money, saying earlier that it was still awaiting legal advice.Aboobakar also doubled as the head of the ODC, and although on suspension from this company, is yet to face any charges.The ODC last year also suspended its Finance Manager Mabos Ortmann.Charges against him are also yet to be formulated.The objectivity of the three-man disciplinary panel in assessing the evidence is now being called into question.Public pressure on the company to act against people involved in the ODC’s botched N$100 million investment is said to have played a role in the action against them. In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul allege that the judgement of the panel that they be sacked, lacked supporting evidence.None of the five witnesses – mostly present and former NDC managers – asked to testify for the company at the disciplinary hearing pointed to any wrongdoing on the part of Aboobakar and Faul in investing the money.”The tribunal’s findings are primarily based on an unfair and selective consideration of portions of the total evidence mostly emphasising aspects of evidence against the employees in total disregard of evidence favouring the defence of the employees,” says lawyer Elia Shikongo, who has been defending the accused.”The effect of above approaches was that the Committee not only failed to apply its mind objectively towards the totality of evidence, but also actively built up a case based on inferences in its judgement upon which it found the employees guilty.”‘ODC INVESTMENT WAS NO SECRET’ Aboobakar and Faul were found guilty of gross negligence, poor performance and exceeding their powers.In addition, Aboobakar was also found guilty of dereliction of duty.Evidence suggests that the investments with the ODC were not made in secret and were discussed with other managers.The board had access to this information through company financial statements.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul say no evidence was presented to suggest that they acted negligently or overstepped their rights and duties.The disciplinary panel recommended their dismissal to the NDC board in March, which the NDC then endorsed.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul insist that the loss of the NDC’s investment rests with the ODC, as part of its N$100 million investment with dubious Botswana investment company Great Triangle Investment.They base this argument on a decision by the Ministry of Trade and Industry in July 2005, that as part of the divestiture process of the NDC, it should transfer all funds it was managing on behalf of special projects and industrial parks to the ODC for management.Most of the money invested with the ODC was intended for these projects and balances of the funds were offset against the investment and outstanding projects.A year earlier, the Ministry of Trade ordered that the ODC assume responsibilities regarding the investment projects of the NDC and an amount of N$78 million was transferred from the NDC to the ODC – this amount included the N$55 million investment.Further, Faul argues that the ODC guaranteed the NDC’s capital and interest when it invested with it.Acting NDC Managing Director Wessel Nanuseb said on Monday that it was still awaiting a ruling by an independent private lawyer on whether the pair have sufficient grounds to appeal the ruling.BID TO SHIFT SPOTLIGHT? Insiders say the sacking of Aboobakar and Faul was a move by the NDC board to shift the spotlight from itself and any blame it should shoulder for not having kept a closer watch on the company’s money.In their appeal, Aboobakar and Faul accuse the disciplinary panel of disregarding company policy, which according to their interpretation gives the Finance Manager the right to deal with investments without board approval.Shikongo argues that the finding of guilty on the gross negligence charge was mainly premised on the panel’s finding that no independent risk assessment of the investment with the ODC had been carried out by NDC employees.Shikongo says such a finding fails to take into account evidence that the risk of the investment rested with the ODC.It is the accused’s contention that as a result the need for an independent risk assessment was not necessary.Witnesses who testified during the disciplinary hearing [mostly other NDC managers] are said to have denied accusations that Aboobakar acted negligently in his involvement with the ODC investment.The tribunal is accused of ignoring evidence which suggested that the investment strategy had been followed.On charges that the pair withheld information from the board when it came to the investment with the ODC, the tribunal is accused of ignoring remarks by an external auditor of the company who confirmed – unchallenged – that not only did the company’s financial statements comply with normal reporting statements, but they disclosed more information than past financial statements.The additional financial statements for projects whose funds the NDC managed, in which investments are reflected, are also said to have been disregarded by the tribunal in its finding that the accused are alleged to have withheld information from the board.Shikongo further argues that his clients did not breach their employment contracts, the NDC Act or its investment policy and thus could not be accused of poor performance.Altogether 17 investment transactions were concluded with the ODC, all of which prescribed an investment period of three months.Besides the capital amount, the ODC also guaranteed interest of 19 per cent.The NDC board has not taken any action against the ODC for its missing money, saying earlier that it was still awaiting legal advice.Aboobakar also doubled as the head of the ODC, and although on suspension from this company, is yet to face any charges.The ODC last year also suspended its Finance Manager Mabos Ortmann.Charges against him are also yet to be formulated.