1. Analysis of the ZACC investigative report into corruption at NatPharm. @ZACConline begins by citing its mandate under the Anti-Corruption Act. The proper starting point for ZACC should be s. 255 of the Constitution. Its mandate is constitutional and that must be made clear. 
2. The report shows that the Deputy Minister Dr John Mangwiro exerted undue influence on the tender process and that he had a conflict of interest. The report itself does not specify Dr Mangwiro’s relationship with Young Health. There’s an annexure but the content should be clear
3. It’s key to show the beneficial ownership of Young Health in the report. The report should also show that the Constitution prohibits conflicts of interest regarding Ministers. This is in a. 106 of the Constitution. The Minister therefore potentially breached the Constitution.
4. A breach of the Constitution is a serious offence which places the matter at the door of the President to whom the Deputy Minister is accountable under s.107 of the Constitution. The buck stops with President @edmnangagwa who has a duty to uphold the Constitution
5. Section 255(1)(e) of the Constitution gives power to the @ZACConline to direct the Commissioner General of police to investigate criminal offences & to report to ZACC. Use of this specific mandate is missing from the recommendations of the report. ZACC should use its mandate.
6. Separately it’s confusing that having detailed the irregularities in the contract award to Young Health, ZACC went on to say it was “genuinely awarded” a tender. It could be a different contract or an inadvertent omission of the word “not” before “genuinely”.
7. In terms of transparency, I would recommend that all tender adjudication processes be recorded. A video or audio recording would assist greatly in gathering evidence of improper conduct by those involved. It might also act as a deterrent to those with nefarious intentions. END
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
