Rédaction Africa Links 24 with Sarah Jane Lebrasse
Published on 2024-04-10 11:00:53
Lawyers involved in the trial against former MSM minister Yogida Sawmynaden submitted their pleadings on Monday in the Intermediate Court, presided over by Magistrate Anusha Rawoah. The former Minister of Commerce, who pleads not guilty, faces two formal charges, namely “forgery in a private writing” and “making use of a forged private writing”, under various sections of the Penal Code. He is accused of submitting a false declaration to the State, committing it to allocate Rs 15,000 monthly for the account of Mrs. Simla Kistnen as his Constituency Clerk, but without her being remunerated.
The forgery charge is based on the Constituency Clerk Declaration Form, dated January 28, 2020, where Yogida Sawmynaden, then Minister of Commerce, had entered the name of Simla Kistnen – the widow of the late MSM political agent of the Quartier-Militaire/Moka constituency (No.8) Soopramanien Kistnen – as his Constituency Clerk. The charge of “making use of a forged private writing” is in relation to the fact that the Constituency Clerk Declaration Form had been transmitted to the Clerk of the National Assembly, resulting in Mrs. Kistnen’s salary as Constituency Clerk being included in the Minister Yogida Sawmynaden’s Pay Packet.
Me Raouf Gulbul, the lawyer representing Yogida Sawmynaden, began his pleading on a point of law. Citing legal authorities in France, he explained that these two offenses cannot be separated, and that under the law, there cannot be two offenses. Furthermore, it is not sufficient for the accused to have known that incorrect information was mentioned in the document; there must have been a fraudulent intent to harm others at that specific moment, which, according to him, has not been proven by the prosecution.
He then focused on the credibility that should be given to Simla Kistnen. He highlighted what he considers to be contradictions from Simla Kistnen, including a detail in her affidavit dated December 21, 2020, related to her Private Prosecution against the former Minister of Commerce, stating that she and her late husband were shocked to learn that she had been employed as Constituency Clerk. This despite the fact that her husband was already dead when she learned about it.
Me Gulbul maintained that the payment for the Constituency Clerk had been given by Yogida Sawmynaden to Kaya Kistnen, in check or cash, with some advance payments.
It was Yogida Sawmynaden who informed the Ministry of Commerce that Mrs. Kistnen was no longer his Constituency Clerk in August 2020. “If he had a fraudulent intent, why would he end this job and stop receiving these payments that were being paid into his salary?” he wondered while requesting the acquittal of his client.
Me Darshana Gayan, representing the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), emphasized that Yogida Sawmynaden is not a novice in public affairs, given his experience as a politician, and he knew exactly what he was doing. Despite this, he admitted to signing the Constituency Clerk Declaration Form, which he then submitted to the Clerk of the National Assembly.
The Constituency Clerk’s allowance was then integrated into the Minister’s Pay Packet. The only question the court must determine, according to the prosecuting lawyer, is: was Simla Kistnen fictitiously employed as a Constituency Clerk by Yogida Sawmynaden?
Me Darshana Gayan pointed out that from January to July 2020, the period during which Simla Kistnen was allegedly employed as a Constituency Clerk by Yogida Sawmynaden, there was not a single call from him to Simla Kistnen. “This speaks volumes,” she added.
She then addressed the credibility of Simla Kistnen as a witness. She continuously denied knowing that she had been employed as the Constituency Clerk of Yogida Sawmynaden.
Regarding her contradictions, which were raised by Raouf Gulbul, Me Gayan highlighted that “Contradictions do not mean lies.” She emphasized that Simla Kistnen admitted her mistakes in court and provided honest explanations, which, according to her, enhanced her credibility.
For Me Gayan, Mrs. Kistnen remains a “trustworthy and truthful witness.” For the prosecuting lawyer, these are “side issues” that have no “direct bearing” on this case.
She highlighted the fact that some payments had been made by Yogida Sawmynaden to the late Kaya Kistnen while Mrs. Kistnen was not even employed as a Constituency Clerk. Other payments were made by Yogida Sawmynaden to the late Kaya Kistnen at random, on various dates and for various amounts.
There were no fixed payments at the end of the month. According to the prosecution, these payments do not establish that a Constituency Clerk’s remuneration had been paid by Yogida Sawmynaden.
Due to the late hour, Magistrate Rawoah adjourned the session.
Read the original article(French) on Le Mauricien
