Police officers in dodgy car imports storm lose case against Zimra

Harare Bureau

GOVERNMENT has heightened its vigilance against fraudulent practices, and is now meticulously tracking all vehicles imported under the Civil Service Rebate Scheme to ensure compliance with lawful procedures.

This decisive action comes in the wake of damning allegations that a significant number of beneficiaries exploited counterfeit rebate letters to unlawfully import vehicles.

The scam centres around 19 police officers, who now stand accused of circumventing legitimate channels to acquire their vehicles. 

Rather than submitting to the Zimbabwe Revenue Authority’s directive for post-clearance audits, the officers, stationed across various precincts in Mashonaland West province, opted for a legal showdown. 

In a dramatic turn, they rushed to the High Court with an urgent application seeking to suspend Zimra’s directive — a move that underscores the tension brewing between law enforcement and tax authorities.

The Civil Service Rebate Scheme, introduced as a Government initiative to afford eligible civil servants the privilege of importing vehicles under tax rebates, is now mired in controversy. 

Allegations have surfaced that the applicants manipulated the system by submitting fraudulent rebate letters. 

These vehicles, now registered with the Central Vehicle Registry in their names, became the focus of an intensifying inquiry after a directive issued on November 22 by the Commissioner-General of Police. 

The directive ordered officers who had benefited from the scheme to present their vehicles for an audit by November 29, 2022.

Rather than comply, the officers mounted a spirited defence, claiming they had adhered to all legal requirements and that their vehicles had undergone proper clearance. 

They argued, through their lawyer, Mr Jimmy Zuze, that the directive was unlawful and that the confiscation of some of their vehicles by the police amounted to an illegal deprivation of property. 

The applicants accused Zimra and the police of overstepping their statutory authority, asserting that the law only permits Zimra to inspect and take possession of documents — not physical goods — under Section 223A of the Customs and Excise Act (Chapter 23:02).

Zimra, however, countered these assertions with the force of law. 

Through its legal representative, Mr Tinashe Lester Marange, the revenue authority argued that their actions were well within the bounds of the Act. Zimra maintained that Section 223A grants it the power to conduct post-clearance audits, which includes not just document examination but, where necessary, the physical inspection of goods. 

Mr Marange further clarified that Section 223A must be read in conjunction with Section 193, which empowers Zimra to seize goods liable to seizure.

Crucially, Zimra emphasised that they had not seized the vehicles in question but merely required their temporary availability for auditing purposes.

In a further blow to the applicants’ case, Mr Tinashe Serengwa, representing the Commissioner-General of Police, argued that the police merely served as facilitators of Zimra’s directive. 

He pointed to Section 219(2)(b) of the Constitution, which mandates the police to co-operate with other lawfully constituted bodies in the detection, investigation, or prevention of offences. 

Mr Serengwa contended that the Zimra directive was a lawful operation conducted in the interests of accountability, and as such, it could not be interdicted.

The case reached its crescendo in the Chinhoyi High Court before Justice Phildah Muzofa, who delivered a decisive and meticulously reasoned judgment. 

Dismissing the officers’ application with costs, Justice Muzofa ruled that Zimra’s post-clearance audit was a lawful and necessary mechanism to ensure the integrity of the rebate scheme.

“Section 223A gives Zimra powers to conduct post-clearance audits to satisfy itself that goods were properly imported. This is a lawful process that cannot be interdicted,” she said.

Justice Muzofa noted that Section 223A unequivocally empowers Zimra to conduct such audits, provided they begin with document examination before escalating to physical inspections if irregularities are identified.

She said the applicants failed to provide evidence that Zimra had unlawfully seized or impounded their vehicles. 

Instead, they were simply required to bring their vehicles to Zimra’s offices for inspection, a directive they failed to comply with. 

The judge found no merit in the applicants’ claims that their rights had been infringed upon, rendering any further arguments moot.

In her judgment, Justice Muzofa also highlighted the applicants’ failure to engage with Mr Maseko, the Zimra official designated to clarify the audit process. Despite clear instructions to contact Mr Maseko for guidance, the applicants made no attempt to seek clarification, which Justice Muzofa deemed a critical oversight. 

She concluded that the applicants’ reluctance to address their queries with Zimra left their case fatally flawed. 

“According to the Zimra directive, the applicants were supposed to contact one Mr Maseko whose details were provided if they had any queries. There was no indication that Mr Maseko was contacted to clarify what exactly they were supposed to do,” Justice Muzofa said.

The ruling sends a resounding message that the post-clearance audit process is a lawful, unassailable mechanism designed to uphold the integrity of tax compliance. 

Justice Muzofa’s judgment not only vindicates Zimra’s mandate, but also underscores the principle that no individual, regardless of rank or office, is above the law. 

Legal experts say the dismissed application serves as a cautionary tale for those who might seek to exploit Government schemes for personal gain.