Uncategorized

Hamukwaya says there is no evidence she received bribe money in High Court bail appeal

Staff Reporter JENNIFER Hamukwaya, the 43-year-old Namibian woman who reached the top echelons of the corporate world before being arrested in a fraud and money laundering case linked to state-owned oil company Namcor, said that Windhoek Magistrate, Linus Samunzala, who denied her bail, did so without providing proof that she received any money into her personal accounts from an alleged N$1.4 million paid as gratification. The alleged N$1.4 million was paid into her husband’s company, Panduleni Farming CC, which is also an accused in the matter. Hamukwaya, alongside nine other accused persons, was arrested in July 2025 after allegedly approving the purchase of fuel storage facilities costing N$53 million for Namcor, only for it to later be discovered that the assets belonged to the defence ministry. They are also accused of violating Namcor’s credit policy by dishing out fuel on credit to companies linked to their fellow accused in return for gratification. Mbaga Siyomunji, in the main heads of argument filed in relation to the appeal application in the High Court, said that Magistrate Samunzala relied heavily on hearsay evidence presented by the investigating officer in the case, Oberty Inambao, which he termed a major mistake in the judgment that denied his client bail. Siyomunji detailed that his client, Hamukwaya, testified that she did not take part in the operations of Panduleni Farming CC and that, apart from acknowledging that payments totalling around N$1,450,000 were received by Panduleni Farming CC from Quality Meat Supplies, she had no insight into the dealings between Quality Meat Supplies and Panduleni Farming CC. “Appellant six (Hamukwaya) also stated that there were other payments that came into Panduleni Farming CC other than from Quality Meat Supplies and that, most importantly, Appellant six did not receive any of the money into her personal bank account. The investigating officer conceded that there were no funds deposited into Appellant six’s personal bank account emanating from the N$1,450,000 paid into Panduleni Farming CC,” Siyomunji said. He added that despite this, Magistrate Samunzala relied on speculation and conspiracies which he could not prove. Siyomunji further quoted a past judgment, Pienaar v The State CA 30/2010 NAHC 135, wherein the High Court emphasised the limited weight to be attached to hearsay when disputed. “The Court further found that the Magistrate erred in elevating these disputed indicators into proof of prima facie involvement,” Siyomunji argued. He further argued that Magistrate Samunzala’s reasoning was brief, conclusory, unsupported by specific facts and, to a large extent, pro-state. “He did not identify concrete evidence of public outcry against Appellant six and he did not explain how Appellant six’s release would prejudice the administration of justice,” Siyomunji said. The lawyer further maintained that his client acted with due diligence with regard to the release of funds of N$53 million for the purchase of fuel storage facilities for Namcor from Enercon, as she had assurance from the managing director, who had the delegated authority to approve such deals, and that she had supporting documents from all other relevant departments. The bail appeal hearing was postponed to 13 February 2026 by appeal judges Eileen Rakow and Philanda Christiaan after most parties in the matter did not file relevant documents on time. Phoo: File

admin Published: January 14, 2026 | Updated: January 15, 2026 3 minutes read

No-proof-of-bribe-payments-Hamukwaya-tells-court-Informante-Image-workspace-1024x677.jpg

Staff Reporter

JENNIFER Hamukwaya, the 43-year-old Namibian woman who reached the top echelons of the corporate world before being arrested in a fraud and money laundering case linked to state-owned oil company Namcor, said that Windhoek Magistrate, Linus Samunzala, who denied her bail, did so without providing proof that she received any money into her personal accounts from an alleged N$1.4 million paid as gratification.

The alleged N$1.4 million was paid into her husband’s company, Panduleni Farming CC, which is also an accused in the matter.

Hamukwaya, alongside nine other accused persons, was arrested in July 2025 after allegedly approving the purchase of fuel storage facilities costing N$53 million for Namcor, only for it to later be discovered that the assets belonged to the defence ministry.

They are also accused of violating Namcor’s credit policy by dishing out fuel on credit to companies linked to their fellow accused in return for gratification.

Mbaga Siyomunji, in the main heads of argument filed in relation to the appeal application in the High Court, said that Magistrate Samunzala relied heavily on hearsay evidence presented by the investigating officer in the case, Oberty Inambao, which he termed a major mistake in the judgment that denied his client bail.

Siyomunji detailed that his client, Hamukwaya, testified that she did not take part in the operations of Panduleni Farming CC and that, apart from acknowledging that payments totalling around N$1,450,000 were received by Panduleni Farming CC from Quality Meat Supplies, she had no insight into the dealings between Quality Meat Supplies and Panduleni Farming CC.

“Appellant six (Hamukwaya) also stated that there were other payments that came into Panduleni Farming CC other than from Quality Meat Supplies and that, most importantly, Appellant six did not receive any of the money into her personal bank account. The investigating officer conceded that there were no funds deposited into Appellant six’s personal bank account emanating from the N$1,450,000 paid into Panduleni Farming CC,” Siyomunji said.

He added that despite this, Magistrate Samunzala relied on speculation and conspiracies which he could not prove.

Siyomunji further quoted a past judgment, Pienaar v The State CA 30/2010 NAHC 135, wherein the High Court emphasised the limited weight to be attached to hearsay when disputed. “The Court further found that the Magistrate erred in elevating these disputed indicators into proof of prima facie involvement,” Siyomunji argued.

He further argued that Magistrate Samunzala’s reasoning was brief, conclusory, unsupported by specific facts and, to a large extent, pro-state. “He did not identify concrete evidence of public outcry against Appellant six and he did not explain how Appellant six’s release would prejudice the administration of justice,” Siyomunji said.

The lawyer further maintained that his client acted with due diligence with regard to the release of funds of N$53 million for the purchase of fuel storage facilities for Namcor from Enercon, as she had assurance from the managing director, who had the delegated authority to approve such deals, and that she had supporting documents from all other relevant departments.

The bail appeal hearing was postponed to 13 February 2026 by appeal judges Eileen Rakow and Philanda Christiaan after most parties in the matter did not file relevant documents on time.

Phoo: File