Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in Dar es Salaam yesterday fixed August 16, this year as the preliminary hearing date of an eight count case facing former Industry and Trade Minister Iddi Simba and two others.
The case has in its fringes, conspiracy, forgery, diversion and abuse of position. It is alleged that the official is responsible for the loss of over 2bn/- funds belonging to Shirika la Usafiri Dar es Salaam (UDA).
Former UDA officials connected with the misappropriation of funds are Salum Mwaking’inda, a former board director and Victor Milanzi Sinza, the state firm’s former general manager and former Sinza Ward Councillor.
Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) Officer Hussein Mussa led the prosecution before the presiding Magistrate, Principal Resident Magistrate Ilvin.
According to the charge sheet it was alleged that on September 2, 2009 in Dar es Salaam, the accused conspired with other unknown persons to commit ‘diversion’ and on the same date and place, Simba and Milanzi with intent to defraud or deceive, forged a letter dated September 2, 2009, purporting to show that all bank accounts of UDA Limited had overdraft facilities, a proclamation deemed untrue and misleading.
A third count alleged that between September 3rd 2009 and March 31, 2010, the accused Simba and Milanzi being the Chairman of the board of directors and the General manager of UDA Limited, respectively, diverted, for their own personal benefit, some 320m/- from one Robert Kisena, claiming the money was an advance commitment and partial payment for shares in UDA Limited.
Simba, Mwaking’inda and Milanzi, it is alleged, did intentionally abuse their position in the course of discharging their duties and by reason of their failure to take reasonable care sold to Simon Group Limited, for 1,142,643,935/- some 7,880,330 of un-issued shares of UDA Ltd , a company jointly owned by the government and Dar es Salaam City Council (DCC).
The accused did the transaction without conducting competitive tendering that would have afforded an opportunity to prospective buyers to offer a competitive price for the acquisition of the shares, an act which was in violation of Regulation 63 (1) of the Public Procurement (Goods, Non-consultant Services and Disposal of Public Assets by Tender) Regulation, 2005 and a violation of the articles of Association of the Company and section 74 of the Companies Act.
The company has as a result, suffered a pecuniary loss estimated at 2,378,858,878/80 had the company earned the best net returns. All the accused are out on bail.