|
Musonda's K180.5m Loan Application With AFSL Was Normal, Says Witness
(AllAfrica.com English Via Thomson Dialog NewsEdge) Lusaka, Aug 18, 2006 (The Post/All Africa Global Media via COMTEX) --Mr Enock Mwale (PW19) Mr Mwale, a manager with Access Financial Services Limited (AFSL) said that he was a member of the credit committee and discussing loan applications was one of his duties.
He said that he used to receive money from Mr Yoram Ngoma of OP in cash amounts ranging from K100 million to K500 million. PW19 testified that in 1999 Mr Musonda obtained a loan of K180.5 million from AFSL to purchase House No. 4 Ingwee Road, Woodlands, Lusaka. He claimed that Mr Musonda's loan was repaid in December 2000 with monies in the sum of K197 million.
Mr Mwale said that the K197 million was transacted with various companies such as Epakor, Meer Care and Desai, DGH, etc. He further said that since some of those companies were connected to OP, therefore Mr Musonda's K197 million was repaid by OP money.
He also told the court that he carried out all his transactions on instructions from his executive director, Mr Aaron Chungu. In cross-examination, PW19 conceded that Mr Musonda's K180.5 million loan application with AFSL was a normal application and that the same was processed in the normal way and approved accordingly.
Asked whether he knew that before applying for a loan at AFSL, Mr Musonda said he had earlier applied for the same loan on November 17, 1999 at Zambia National Building Society (ZNBS), Mr Mwale said that he was not aware of that. It was put to him that, in fact, even ZNBS had also approved Mr Musonda's K180.5 million loan application as per ZNBS letter dated 18 November 1999.
However, it was simply because the ZNBS loan disbursement terms were not acceptable to the vendor, First Merchant Bank In liquidation that Mr Musonda did not take up the ZNBS offer, a position that PW19 said he did not know about.
We humbly submit that the fact that both ZNBS and AFSL had approved the same K180.5 million loan meant that Mr Musonda was very credit worthy and that AFSL approval of his loan was purely on merit and no other criterion or motive, whatsoever.
PW19 was also strongly challenged on his assertions that Mr Musonda's loan was paid from OP money. He was asked as to whether he knew that Mr Musonda's loan repayments with AFSL in the total sum of K200 million were from Mr and Mrs Musonda's own resources and not from OP money and Mwale said that he was not aware of that.
He was also asked whether he was aware of the K9 million cheque paid on April 30, 2002 to AFSL towards the servicing of the K180.5 million AFSL loan but he expressed ignorance. Further asked as to whether he was aware of another K191 million cheque paid to AFSL through Ernst & Young on November 27, 2002, PW19 said that he was not aware.
It was also put to PW19 that from the aforesaid repayments Mr Musonda had, in fact, paid a total sum of K200 million on the AFSL loan of K180.5 million and that due to accrued interest he was only left with K19 million to fully clear the subject loan but once again, PW19 said he did not know about that position.
We humbly submit that PW19 expressed so much ignorance on Mr Musonda's loan servicing issues that it is dangerous to trust his allegations against Mr Musonda. Besides, the fact that PW19 claimed not to know about Mr Musonda's own AFSL loan servicing did not at all mean that Mr Musonda's loan repayments did not exist because D52 and D60b proved that Mr Musonda has so far paid a total sum of K200.0 million on the subject AFSL house loan.
Regarding the K197.0 million December 2000 transaction Mr Mwale had earlier referred to involving Meer Care, Epakor, etc., he was asked what Mr Musonda's role was in those transactions and he emphatically told the court that Mr Musonda did not play any role at all and that he had nothing to do with those transactions: Counsel: Mr Mwale, what role did Mr Musonda play in those transactions?
Mwale: Nothing. Counsel: Did Mr Musonda give you any instructions regarding those transactions? Mwale: No. Counsel: What influence did Mr Musonda have on those transactions? Mwale: No influence. Counsel: Did Mr Musonda have anything to do with those transactions?
Mwale: No, Your Honour. Counsel: Thank you. We humbly submit that PW19 confirmed the consistent defence argument that the internal management, financing and accounting of AFSL operations was a preserve and prerogative of AFSL managers and directors.
Mr Musonda, as an outsider client of AFSL, like all other AFSL clients, had no control or influence, whatsoever, over the internal affairs of AFSL even as Mwale also confirmed during cross-examination. As for the money PW19 claimed was being delivered to him by Yoram Ngoma (PW16) of OP, he conceded in cross-examination that he did not know where that money was coming from.
He also said that he was not signing for the money he was receiving from Mr Ngoma. We humbly submit that in Mr Ngoma's own testimony, he had told the court that the only people to whom he took the money, which he was collecting from ZANACO were OP DG, Mr Xavier Chungu or Mr Yotamu Zulu and as such, Mr Mwale's testimony on his dealings with Mr Ngoma did not reflect consistency.
In any case, the clear and emphatic position of the defence was and still is that there was absolutely no relationship whatsoever between Mr Musonda's official duties at ZANACO and his personal, normal debt and straight forward issues with AFSL. Mr John Jumba (PW20)
Mr Jumba, a valuer at the Government Valuation Department simply confirmed that property No 4 Ingwee Road, Woodlands, Lusaka is jointly owned by Mr Samuel B. Musonda and Mrs Roydah C. Musonda. When in cross-examination PW20 was asked on mortgage creation and administration, he expressed so much ignorance that he conceded that he was not at all competent to discuss Mr Musonda's mortgage issues in court.
We humbly submit that Mr Jumba's testimony was of little consequence to the case. In fact, in matters of lending, the onus to register or create a mortgage on a loan-related asset is on the lender, AFSL and not on the borrower, Mr Musonda. Further, for the subject AFSL K180.5 million loan availed to Mr Musonda, the AFSL term loan's contract dated 4 December 1999 provided two options on mortgage registration, namely:
(i) Clause 6(2) indicated that mortgage registration was optional. (ii) Clause 8 referred to mortgage security. As to which option was preferred or taken in this regard, was a simple and sole prerogative of the lender, AFSL and the practices articulated in clauses 6 and 8 are both tenable in lending and finance, the world over.
Again, we re-iterate the fact that Mr Musonda was not responsible for running the internal management or affairs of AFSL not even the registration or perfection of AFSL securities but that the same was the responsibility of the managers and directors of AFSL. Mr Trevor Nyoni (PW21)
Mr Nyoni was the arresting officer. He said that he went to ZANACO, Cairo Road Business Centre to investigate transactions authorised by Mr Musonda, which were being conducted on the Suspense Debtors' account.
PW21 said he interviewed some people at ZANACO on those transactions and that he collected from Mr Mwanamwalye debit entries for the cash withdrawals and the said vouchers were produced in court as exhibits P1- P92. He said that afterwards he went to Access Financial Services Ltd (AFSL) where he confirmed that Mr Musonda obtained in 1999 a loan of K180.5 million to purchase House No 4, Ingwee Road Woodlands, Lusaka also known as property No. 2075, Lusaka.
He claimed that Mr Musonda's house loan at AFSL was repaid in December 2000 in the sum of K197 million using OP money. He said that he restricted the house and he produced the said restriction notice. He further told the court that he arrested Mr Musonda in June 2004 and charged him with 50 counts of abuse of authority of office relating to the subject OP cash withdrawals which Mr Nyoni felt were being carried out by Mr Musonda and others without authority or simply for personal reasons best known to Mr Musonda and others.
Under cross-examination, PW21 exhibited a lot of glaring ignorance on banking and even on both the general and high level government machinery operations, and it was very clear that Mr Nyoni did not understand the issues he was investigating and most of what he said about the house loan was what he had been told by Mr Mwale and not what he investigated himself, as such.
First and foremost, Mr Nyoni conceded that, he did not know Mr Musonda's terms of employment. Asked whether he had read any of Mr Musonda's employment contracts, PW21 admitted that he had not read anything and neither had he ever seen any of Mr Musonda's employment contracts.
He was challenged that since he did not even know Mr Musonda's terms of reference, he was then not competent to determine what he was claiming to have been Mr Musonda's abuse of office. To that challenge, PW21 failed to give a meaningful answer. PW21 also exhibited ignorance when he was challenged on Suspense Debtors Account operations.
He, for instance failed to explain why he had produced in court only debit vouchers which represented cash withdrawals and not credit vouchers also which represented cash/funds deposited into the same suspense debtors account at ZANACO, Cairo Road Business Centre. Mr Nyoni seemed not even to have known that all the subject monies disbursed on the suspense debtors' account were fully repaid by government without loss to ZANACO.
We humbly submit that PW21's investigations fell short because he brought to court one-sided information about the OP withdrawal vouchers but deliberately failed to bring to court the deposit vouchers which proved that all the subject loans were paid back by OP. If Mr Nyoni had done his investigation properly, he would have found out that all the OP lendings were done with the authority of government.
He would also have found out that Mr Musonda had the authority to lend OP the money. Regarding Mr Musonda's K180.5 million Term Loan with Access Financial Services Limited (AFSL), the cross-examination established that PW21 did not know that prior to applying to AFSL, Mr Musonda actually had applied earlier for the same loan with Zambia National Building Society (ZNBS) who also approved the same loan as per ZNBS letter dated 18 November 1999.
The ZNBS loan offer was not taken by Mr Musonda just because ZNBS proposed a staggered loan disbursement not lump sum release which proposal was not acceptable to the vendor of the house, First Merchant Bank In-Liquidation. Thus, Mr Nyoni did not know that Mr Musonda's loan at AFSL was approved on merit based upon his own credit worthiness and ability to service the debt just as the ZNBS approval also confirmed.
For instance, he did not even know Mr Musonda's salary as ZANACO MD, which ranged from US$99,000 in 1997 to US$150,000 in 2000/2002, per annum i.e. a monthly gross salary of K55,596,142 culminating into a net salary of K35,430,044 as at May 2002.
Nyoni also did not know that Mr Musonda had actually repaid a total of K200 million towards the AFSL K180.5 term loan vide instalments of K9 million in April/May 2002 and K191.0 million in November/December 2002. In fact, Mr Nyoni further conceded during cross-examination that he never interviewed or interrogated Mr Musonda over the house issue.
Even the restriction on the house Mr Nyoni was referring to was carried out without anyone, Mr Nyoni the arresting officer included, interviewing Mr Musonda or asking Mr Musonda about it at all. It was put to PW21 that the way he behaved on the house issue without interrogating the accused, gave an impression that he had an already predetermined motive about it, to which challenge he feebly attempted to protest.
When he was also challenged to explain the purported K197 million repayment he claimed was from OP money, he could not explain the AFSL accounting transactions but said that he was told by Mr Mwale. When it was therefore put to him that Mr Musonda had nothing to do with the purported AFSL transactions of December 2000, Nyoni could not offer any meaningful responses.
During cross-examination, it was apparent that PW21 also did not know about the unique relationship that had always existed over many years between GRZ and ZANACO arising from GRZ being the beneficial owners of ZANACO by more than 99 per cent.
For instance, Mr Nyoni conceded that he was not aware of the many sovereign and special assignments of GRZ carried out by ZANACO over the years as a matter of government policy directives and in the strategic interests of the nation. He was not aware of, say:
(i) the tear gas GRZ bought through ZANACO in 1990/91 to quell the then anticipated riots arising from the country-wide demands of that time for multiparty democracy as opposed to one-party state. (ii) US$2 million GRZ paid through ZANACO in 1979/80 towards the Ugandan war efforts aimed at removing Idi Amin from power. (iii) the foiling by GRZ of the 1997 military coup attempt with the financial assistance rendered to government by ZANACO on the very day of the coup attempt.
(iv) the K250 million ZANACO lent to the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) in 2001 to enable DEC track down suspected truck loads of illegal weapons.
(v) The more than K1 billion given to ZANACO on 23 and 24 December 2001 for remittance throughout the country at the rate of K10 million per constituency to beef up the 2001 presidential and general elections campaign.
(vi) The K300 million ZANACO lent to UNZA on January 2, 2002 to facilitate President Mwanawasa's swearing-in ceremony on that same day and thereby averted the potential civil war that threatened to engulf the country because of those hotly disputed presidential elections.
(vii) The K4,626,000,000=00 payment of May 21, 2002 made by GRZ through ZANACO in settlement of the presidential challenger aircraft bills. In all the foregoing challenges relating to government special, sensitive and highly confidential assignments undertaken by ZANACO, among others, Mr Nyoni expressed total ignorance during cross-examination.
Mr Nyoni did not even understand that the GRZ directives of May 29, 2000 for ZANACO to transfer K4 billion from ZCCM to cover the subject OP debts was effected in government's sovereign capacity and jurisdiction as the beneficial owners of both ZANACO and ZCCM Investment Holdings. He also did not know that arising from the said K4 billion transfer, GRZ was able to disguise OP debts away from the attention of the IMF and the donor community as per longstanding government policy directives.
When he was asked whether he knew that it was discreet operations like the said K4 billion transfer that made the country, Zambia, qualify for the HIPC benchmarks, Mr Nyoni expressed ignorance. PW21 was also not aware that the government policy of disguising OP debts away from the attention of the IMF and the donor community was actually put in place as way back as 1995 as per Mr Xavier Chungu's letter of April 14, 1995 and the endorsement thereof by the late Honourable Penza through his letter of May 21, 1995.
The said GRZ policy arrangement was therefore in place even before Mr Musonda became ZANACO MD. Given PW21's aforesaid glaring ignorance on so many issues relating to Mr Musonda's responsibilities and mandates, as well as his lack of awareness of basic and high-level government machinery operations, his investigation competence and professionalism is strongly suspect.
It was actually put to him that his arrest and charging of Mr Musonda was either born out of a pre-determined position against Mr Musonda or out of sheer investigation incompetence and professional deficiency on his part, which challenge Mr Nyoni feebly attempted to parry. This is the sum of the prosecution case. The Defence
The defence called six witnesses in rebuttal of the prosecution testimony. As in the prosecution case, we shall be analysing and submitting on the defence evidence as we rehash each witness testimony
Mr Samuel Bwalya Musonda (DW1) Mr Musonda's banking career and challenges. Mr Musonda commenced his defence by giving the court a detailed account of his glittering banking career with ZANACO spanning a period of about 26 years. He explained that he was a career banker who rose from junior ranks from as way back as January 1977 right through supervisory, managerial and executive ranks.
For instance, after serving in various positions and in various Zambian branches of ZANACO including head office, Mr Musonda testified that he was, in recognition of his good performance, appointed manager of ZANACO London Branch in the United Kingdom where he served for a period of four years, from 1991-1995. In 1995 he was appointed ZANACO deputy managing director and in December 1996, he was appointed ZANACO managing director, a position he held up to June 19, 2002 when his employment contract was terminated by the Republican President.
Mr Musonda, a university graduate of Economics and Business Management, said that throughout his career he underwent various professional courses in banking, finance, general management, etc. The said courses were undertaken at home and abroad.
He also served as a director on the boards of various companies in Zambia, UK and USA. At one stage, he was a member of the board of directors on 12 different companies and organisations at the same time. He also served for six years as president of the Zambia Federation of Employers. Mr Musonda also presented papers on banking and finance at various fora in Zambia, in other African countries and a lot in the UK.
He also addressed and presented a paper on banking and finance in October 1997 to the Commonwealth Business Forum and the same was attended by quite a good number of Commonwealth Heads of State and government. Further, in the execution of his duties, especially as ZANACO MD, Mr Musonda said that he participated in various government delegations or missions, which went to different countries of the world to negotiate Zambia's financial and economic contracts.
Prominent among the said delegations were missions relating to Zambia's negotiations with the IMF, the World Bank and other co-operating partners in USA, UK, Czech Republic, Hong Kong, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, etc. That also included attending the annual general meetings of the IMF and the World Bank in USA and other countries.
As ZANACO MD, he also used to be part of the GRZ delegations that undertook missions almost every year to the African Development Bank (ADB) in Ivory Coast where the financing programmes/agreements of Zambia's various development projects were negotiated and reviewed. Mr Musonda also told the court that he participated in various HIPC negotiations between GRZ on one hand, and the IMF as well as the World Bank on the other.
Those HIPC negotiations and performance thereof eventually culminated in Zambia's attainment of the HIPC decision point in 2001 and the HIPC completion point in 2005 giving rise to our country's benefit in terms of debt cancellation. Among the highlights of his career, Mr Musonda cited the following:
(a) ZANACO Restructuring. It involved a radical modernisation of ZANACO in terms of rationalisation of the management structures, operations, technology, staff reduction from 3,200 to 1,300, reduction of personal-to-holder motor vehicles from 120 to two, etc. It culminated in the general improvement of ZANACO's overall performance in terms of improved profits, efficiency and effectiveness of the bank.
(b) HIPC Qualification. Apart from participating in HIPC negotiations, ZANACO was also one of the HIPC benchmarks set by the IMF and the World Bank. Mr Musonda said that it was therefore challenging as well as gratifying to have contributed to the HIPC decision point qualification in 2001 based upon a set performance criterion of that time.
Regarding his overall performance in his banking career, he said that he received commendations from various authorities, which included the ZANACO board, Bank of Zambia, GRZ, etc. Thus, Mr Musonda said that he was first appointed ZANACO MD on December 13, 1996 as per ZANACO board minutes of that day where he was identified by the board as the one with appropriate skills to take the bank forward.
His employment contracts were articulated in the appointment letters/contracts marked as D1, D2, D3, D4 and D5, and the same were executed by the then ZANACO board chairman, Mr Shalaulwa Shimukowa and Mr Musonda. Mr Musonda's salary rose from US$99,000 (about K400 million) per annum in 1997 to US$150,000 (about K667 million) per annum for the period 2000 to 2002. Among his terms of reference, Mr Musonda said that Clause 8 of his performance contracts gave him sufficient mandate and wide discretion as far as dealing with issues relating to the sovereign requirements of GRZ who are majority shareholders of ZANACO were concerned.
On the ZANACO/GRZ relationship and interface. Mr Musonda also highlighted the uniqueness of ZANACO in terms of its relationship with GRZ.
He said that whereas the banking and financial services Acts of 1994 as amended, stipulates that no single entity or institution is allowed to own more than 25 per cent shareholding in any bank in Zambia except foreign quoted banks like Barclays Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, etc, yet GRZ as a single entity, owns 99.8 per cent shareholding in ZANACO.
He testified that the said unique relationship between ZANACO and GRZ was further deepened by the fact that for ZANACO, government is the owner and it is the major customer of ZANACO and through Bank of Zambia government is the regulator of the bank.
Mr Musonda said that arising from the 1967 and 1968 government economic reforms ZANACO was established in 1969 to assist GRZ in the implementation of the socio-economic programmes of the government. Other objectives for the establishment of ZANACO included carrying out such special and sensitive government assignments as could not be carried out by a foreign bank or a bank not owned by government.
As an example of special and sensitive assignments of GRZ carried out by ZANACO, Mr Musonda cited the event of the October 1997 military coup attempt when ZANACO was compelled by government to open one of its branches in the national security interest, and made money available to government with which GRZ was able to mobilize its security forces and quelled the coup deta.
He also said that at times ZANACO was required to deliver or collect money to and from government even at midnight. The other special or national security related assignments Mr Musonda cited to have been carried by his bank included the following:
(i) Government payment in 1979 of US$2 million through ZANACO towards the Ugandan war effort of removing Idi Amin from power in what was code named Obote 2 operation.
(ii) Lending money to OP some time in the 1980s when he personally dealt with a Mr Sichinga of OP, and he said that particular lending had to do with the Iran-Iraqi war issues of that time.
(iii) Government purchase of tear gas through ZANACO in 1990/91 for quelling anticipated riots associated with anti-one party state demonstrations.
(iv) K250 million lent to DEC in 2001 to assist them track down suspected truck load of illegal weapons. (v) Money/cash totalling more that K1.0 billion given to ZANACO by Honourable V.J. Mwaanga and former president Chiluba on 23rd and 24 December 2001 which was remitted by ZANACO throughout the country at the rate of K10 million per constituency to beef up the 2001 presidential and general elections campaign.
(vi) K300 million lent to UNZA on 2 January 2002 to facilitate the swearing-in of President Mwanawasa and thereby averted the potential civil war that threatened to engulf the country due to the then hotly disputed election result.
(vii) The various amounts in millions of Kwacha at a time lent to Zambia Army over many years for soldiers salaries and other military logistical support, thereby contributing to the maintenance of the country's national peace and security.
(viii) Assisting government in qualifying for HIPC decision point in 2001. He said that in all the above instances which involved ZANACO lending money to GRZ institutions like OP, DEC, UNZA and Zambia Army, no security or collateral was provided to ZANACO but that all the said debts were fully repaid to the bank without loss to ZANACO.
Mr Musonda also testified that there were incidences when they refused to comply with certain government directives. He said that those were in cases where they felt that the transaction was not professional and/or was not in the national interest. He cited some such transactions as:
(i) the government financing arrangement of US$100 million referred to in the Ministry of Finance letter of 24 October 2000 involving two international financiers, namely: Eaglet Corporation (US $66million) and Forex Trading (US $34million). (ii) the GRZ financing arrangement of US$52 million referred to in the Food Reserve Agency (FRA) documentation/letter dated 7 August 1998 involving FRA, Ministry of Finance and an international financier called Equifin International.
At the risk of losing his job save for president Chiluba's intervention, Mr Musonda said that he and his bank refused to effect or participate in both of the above transactions as he considered them not to have met a professional banking criterion and he also viewed the same not to have been in the national interest.
However, Mr Musonda also told the court that there were times when government took certain decisions, which were even over the heads of the ZANACO management and its board of directors. In other words, there were instances where ZANACO refused to carry out certain Government directives but government prevailed and overruled ZANACO and GRZ directives were ultimately implemented.
Examples of GRZ overruling ZANACO decisions included the following: (i) Government directive through ZIMCO in 1994 for ZANACO to lend the then ailing Zambia Airways the sum of US$5 million as part of government's un-successful efforts of trying to save Zambia Airways from collapsing.
Despite ZANACO's protestations as lending to Zambia Airways at that time was not considered commercially viable by ZANACO, yet GRZ prevailed and that money was lent to Zambia Airways in 1994. Mr Musonda was himself told to release the said US$5 million from ZANACO London Branch where he was serving at that time as the Branch Manager and the money was released as directed. (ii) The ZANACO take-over of Chase Trust Bank in 1997.
Despite ZANACO refusal to takeover the insolvent Chase Trust Bank in 1997, GRZ overruled ZANACO and the Bank was compelled to take over the bank. That takeover entailed ZANACO absorbing a loss of K1.4 billion, the very thing the ZANACO had protested against. In fact, it was the ZANACO/GRZ clash over the Chase Trust Bank issue that forced the then minister of finance, honourable Penza to summon a special ZANACO board meeting of 3 October 1997.
Mr Musonda testified that at that board meeting, the minister strongly re-stated and re-emphasized ZANACO's imperative role in fulfilling GRZ directives and programmes at all times and the GRZ position was re-adopted at the subsequent ZANACO board meeting held on 13 November 1997. (a) Pages 6&7 section: government policy and the role of ZANACO, (b) page 11, section: ad hoc committee. (iii) Payment of K4.626.000.000 for the foreign bill relating to the presidential challenger aircraft as per Ministry of Finance directive of 21 May 2002.
Despite ZANACO's earlier refusal, GRZ insisted that the payment be made as the same was critical at that time in facilitating President Mwanawasa's trip to the AU Heads of State Summit in Ethiopia. (iv) Government refusal in 1998 to pay interest on the K33 billion second Republic GRZ debts relating to various parastatals.
Despite ZANACO's concerted demands, GRZ only paid the principal debts of K14.2 billion in 1998/99 as articulated in the ZANACO board minutes. He said that even the GRZ ultimate settlement of the said K14.2 billion was not done until 16 August and 15 November 1999.
He stated that in almost all those clashes apart from the US$100m and US$52m financing arrangements already referred to, government, being the beneficial owners of ZANACO, had an upper hand and overruled ZANACO. Mr Musonda further said that the ZANACO/GRZ clashes on various issues existed even before 13 December 1996 when he became ZANACO MD. In that connection, he cited ZANACO/GRZ clashes on various issues during Mr Kaitano Chungu's tenure as ZANACO MD as referred to in the following ZANACO board minutes.
Mr Musonda further testified that throughout his tenure as ZANACO MD, the bank underwent annual audits conducted by both the ZANACO internal auditors as well as the bank's external auditors and both were satisfied with the conduct and performance of ZANACO.
In corporate governance for all companies, the external auditors opinion forms the single most important aspect of the annual audit. In the case of ZANACO, Mr Musonda said that throughout his stewardship of the bank (1996 to 2002), the bank's external auditors always confirmed ZANACO's compliance to the Companies Act of 1994 as well as to the Banking and Financial Services Act of 1994 as amended.
Thus, the external auditors opinion on ZANACO always stated: In our opinion the financial statements give a true and fair view of the state of the bank's affairs at and of its profit and cash flows for the year then ended and have been properly prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 1994 and the Banking and Financial Services Act 1994 as amended and the accounting and other records and registers have been properly kept in accordance with the Acts.
Mr Musonda said that it was such good stewardship of the bank which made both the ZANACO board as well as government (owners/shareholders of ZANACO) commend him from time to time as already articulated which included GRZ commendations of 28 June 2001.
TO BE CONTINUED
Copyright 2006 The Post. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com).
[ Back To TMCnet.com's Homepage ]
|
INDUSTRIES
Activate Email 
Find Solutions for Enterprises, SMBs & Service Providers at the INTERNET TELEPHONY Conference and EXPO East, January 20-22, 2010. Miami, FL.
