CORRUPTION has been widely considered one of the main drawbacks of the Zimbabwean economy and the Prevention of Corruption Act justifiably seeks to provide for the prevention of this vice and the investigation of claims arising from dishonesty or corruption, a
mong other matters.
It does not seek to fuel corruption in the process as seems to be the situation emanating from its implementation in Zimbabwe.
The Act empowers the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, or any other minister assigned by the president to administer it, to specify persons to be investigated for suspected corrupt practices.
In doing so, the minister is endowed with sweeping powers that include appointing a suitable person to conduct an investigation into suspected corrupt activities as specifically defined by the Act.
In appointing such investigators, the minister may appoint any member of the public service or any suitable person.
Clearly, the option to appoint a member of the public service has conspicuous benefits to the nation, considering that such a person is already on the government payroll and that their appointment will not invite an unnecessary
drain on our already stretched fiscus.
History however suggests that there is more to recent appointments of investigators than meets the eye.
To that end, I challenge the minister to explain why he has appointed Reggie Francis Saruchera of Camelsa Chartered Accountants as a preferred investigator in many specification assignments in the recent past.
Saruchera has been getting the nod ahead of other eligible investigators at a cost to the taxpayers.
Is this not fiscal indiscipline at its highest order?
What special skills does Saruchera command that other chartered accountants in Zimbabwe do not have?
Would the honourable minister concerned care to publicly justify his perennial choice of specification investigators?
Until then, I cannot rest my case.