Robin Matanga v The State

### Preamble
1
HH-153-13
CA 373/06
---------


ROBIN MATANGA

versus

THE STATE

HIGH COURT OF ZIMBABWE

BHUNU & DUBE JJ

HARARE, 18 October 2011, 8 November 2012,

30 November 2012 and 9 April 2013

S. Mandungumana, for the Appellant

R. Chikosha, for the Respondent.

Criminal Appeal

BHUNU J: The appellant a 40 year old first offender was properly convicted after contest of contravening s 4 (a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Cap. 9:16]. The appellant who was employed as a Finance, Administration and Human Resources Executive by the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Holdings corruptly appointed Raphnok Investments P/L as an advertising agent well knowing that it was not his duty to make such an appointment and that the company did not qualify for such appointment.

Upon conviction he was sentenced on 23 May 2006 at Harare Regional Magistrates court to 18 Months imprisonment of which 6 months were suspended for a period of 5 years on the usual conditions of good behaviour. Having conceded that the conviction is proper he now appeals to this Court against sentence only.

Having regard to the seriousness and prevalence of the offence the Court grudgingly accepted the State’s concession that the sentence errs on the side of excessiveness. In accepting the state’s concession the Court was persuaded that this was not a very serious form of corruption in that the appellant merely wrote a letter of appointment and did not benefit from his criminal conduct.

Upon considering all the relevant factors for determination the court considers that a fine is wholly inappropriate as punishment for this type of misdemeanour as it tends to trivialise what is essentially a grave offence that must be nipped in the bud at all costs. Corruption is an insidious disease that has permeated all facets of life in this country. The Court will be failing in its duty if it does not pass stiff and deterrent sentences to exorcise the ghost of corruption.

For the foregoing reasons we consider that a substantial amount of community service coupled with a wholly suspended term of imprisonment will meet the justice of this case. The Community Service Officer’s Pre-Sentence Report indicates that the appellant is a suitable candidate for community service. He is a first offender, married with 4 school going children.  Community service in the circumstances of this case will enable him to attorney for his criminal conduct without visiting undue hardship on his innocent family.

In the result the sentence imposed by the Regional Magistrate is set aside and replaced by the following sentence:

That the accused be and is hereby sentenced to 18 months imprisonment of which 9 months imprisonment is suspended on condition the accused does not again within that period commit any offence involving corruption or dishonesty and for which he is sentenced to imprisonment without the option of a fine.

The remaining 9 months imprisonment is suspended on condition the accused completes 315 hours of community service assigned to him by the person in charge at Ruwa Rehabilitation Centre or his delegate on the following terms-

The community service starts on 20 April 2013 and must be completed within a period of 6 months.

The community service must be performed between the hours of 8am to 1pm and 2pm and 4pm every  Saturday and Sunday which is not a public holiday to the satisfaction of the person in charge or his delegate ,who may grant the accused leave to be absent on a particular day or days or during certain hours. Any such leave of absence shall not count as part of the community service to be performed.

BHUNU J..........................................................

DUBE J agrees...................................................