Africa-Press – Namibia. SISA Namandje, the legal representative of two of the accused in the fraud and corruption case of the National Petroleum Corporation of Namibia (Namcor), has said that the Magistrate who denied his clients bail failed to place all evidence on the scales of justice to make a fact-finding inquiry, but rather just focused on the evidence led by the investigating officer in the matter.
Namandje commenced with the appeal hearing, challenging the refusal of bail by Magistrate Linus Samunzala to his clients Peter and Malakia Elindi before High Court judges of appeal Christiaan Philanda and Eileen Rakow.
The Elindi brothers were arrested in July 2025 alongside 13 other individuals in the fraud and corruption case, whereby ex-Namcor employees allegedly conspired with private business owners to defraud the state oil entity of over N$400 million in exchange for bribes. The said fraudulent activities were said to have been orchestrated via bogus asset deals and the circumventing of internal fuel credit policies by key executives at Namcor.
Namandje said that Magistrate Samunzala made a blanket statement saying that, except for Olivia Dunaiski, most of the bail applicants contradicted themselves on material facts, but he never pointed out what these material contradictions were.
He added that the Magistrate refused to say anything negative about the investigating officer, Oberty Inambao, and ignored concessions made by Inambao that would have been fatal to the State’s case.
He further added that although his clients were charged with a count of fraud, the investigating officer admitted that there was no misrepresentation made on the signing of an asset purchase agreement in July 2022, inked between Namcor and Enercon Namibia, a company owned by the Elindi brothers.
The agreement would see Namcor purchase oil storage facilities from Enercon for the amount of N$53 million, but it was later established that the said assets were only encumbered under a 15-year agreement between Enercon and the Ministry of Defence.
Namandje said that the Magistrate erred in law and fact when he ignored evidence related to the commercial viability of the project and used flowery language that Namcor was “sold a dream” by Enercon and never took charge of the assets.
He, however, said that certain facts, such as Namcor securing an exclusive petroleum supply (12 million litres per annum) agreement with Enercon due to the asset purchase deal, were overlooked.
Namandje added that after the asset purchase agreement lapsed after 15 years, Namcor would take over the exclusive supply of fuel to the Ministry of Defence, and this was never disputed.
“The weighing of the seriousness of the case and public interest was tied into the allegations of the N$53 million payment. It is not for the Magistrate to find fault in one party but to make a fact-finding inquiry. The accused said it was never a dream sold,” Namandje argued.
Further to this, Namandje said that serious concessions made by the investigating officer, in which he admitted that the State does not fear that the accused would abscond, interfere in investigations, or pose a danger to the public interest or the administration of justice, were overlooked, leading to serious questions on what triggered the arrest of his clients.
For More News And Analysis About Namibia Follow Africa-Press
