3.4.4 Negligence of Duty by ZESA HOLDINGS Board and Management
The Committee was informed by the board and management of ZESA Holdings, that it did not have the full details of the manner in which the contract was awarded Intratrek. The board and management were not knowledgeable on the circumstances leading to the release of the over US$5 million to Intratrek without a bank guarantee. The Committee found the ZESA Board and management negligent in superintending over the projects being undertaken by their subsidiary company. The attitude of the board and its management led by Dr. Murerwa and the Group CEO Eng J. Chifamba respectively, was one where they placed the onus on ZPC officials to inform them of any challenges they were facing in the implementation of the project.
3.4.5 Return of the Contractor on Site
On the 23rd of April, the Committee was disappointed to learn from the Permanent Secretary of Energy and Power Development, Mr. P. Mbiriri that the contractor, that is Intratrek, had returned on site to complete the pre-commencement works. The position was supported by the Acting Managing Director of ZPC Mr. J. Chirikutsi. The reasons for Intratrek’s return were that ZPC was trying to reduce its financial exposure and secondly, the contract between the parties had not been terminated. The officials from ZESA Holding even had the audacity to thank the Committee through its enquiry on the matter. This had exerted a lot of pressure on the contractor to fulfill its part of the bargain. The Chief Executive Officer of ZESA Holdings, Eng Chifamba and management of ZPC, decided to overlook all the violations of the law made in the awarding of the contract to Intratrek. The Committee noted with concern that the parastatal was not willing to pierce the corporate veil of Intratrek but to focus on Intratrek as a legitimate company with a strong technical partner, Chint electric. It is the Committee’s position that the culture and style of doing business has not changed at ZESA Holdings under this new political dispensation. ZESA Holdings is not willing to protect its integrity and is willing to do business with companies managed by profiles that are not in sync with the law at the expense of the corruption.
3.5 Political Interference
The Committee has no doubt that there was political interference in the awarding of the Gwanda National solar project to Intratrek and in the release of public funds for the pre-commencement works without a bank guarantee. Going forward, the mind-set of members of the Executive, boards and management of State Owned Parastatals (SOPs) need to change, from one of undue care and corrupt activities to one of seeking to ensure their companies make meaningful contributions to the growth of the economy. Zesa Holdings and other public entities should be guided by the new law, the Public Entities Corporate Governance Act on on how to handle political interference.
Section 72 of the law states that “the moral duty of courage requires that a director should overcome fear in order to do the right thing; that he or she should take a position even if it makes him or her unpopular and that he or she should create an ethical environment even when faced with opposition from superiors and subordinates”. In the same vein, members of the Executive need to be principled and to be guided by section 444 of the Schedule of that same law where it states that “there must be will-power to combat corruption on the part of the top leadership of the country which should cascade down to the ordinary man and woman. The will-power should filter through to directors and managers of companies, parastatals and State-controlled companies”. –
This law should be read together with the Public Finance Management Act, particularly Section 51A which touches on the separation of roles of Ministers and public entities where it stipulates that “Government must:
(a) Not be involved in the day-to-day management of public entities and should allow them full operational autonomy to achieve their defined objectives.
(b) Let boards of public entities exercise their responsibilities and should respect their independence”.
It was made clear during the oral evidence sessions held with ZPC Board and Management that Hon Dr. Undenge, the then Minister of Energy and Power Development, used to have direct communication with ZPC management. He was purported to be the one who gave instructions on payments made to Intratek.
Continued next page
(633 VIEWS)
