Lawyers for six accused in the alleged NamCor corruption matter have challenged the bail ruling of Windhoek magistrate Linus Samunzala, arguing in the High Court that the magistrate failed to properly assess the evidence throughout the bail proceedings.

The lawyers argued that magistrate Samanzula applied a blanket approach and relied on factors not linked to individual accused persons.

Sisa Namandje, representing Peter and Malakia Elindi, told the court the magistrate was unprepared and unwilling to give his clients a fair hearing when he denied them bail.

He further argued that the magistrate failed to deal with contradictions and concessions made by the investigating officer.
Namandje said the magistrate found the state had a prima facie case on all charges without exception and that this showed he was not prepared to dispense justice to his clients. 

He said the magistrate assessed the evidence unlawfully.
Namandje also challenged the magistrate's acceptance of the claim that the Elindis sold a "dream" to Namcor, saying the court accepted this without a basis.

Ngakumbirue Katjivena, who represents accused Leo Nandago, argued that the magistrate wrongly found his client misled the court. 

He said Nandago had nothing to gain from misleading the court and that the magistrate did not consider his founding affidavit.

He argued that Malima's flight and the alleged missing luxury vehicle linked to Mulunga had nothing to do with his client.

Katjivena said Nandago had no administrative oversight and no signatory rights to the bank accounts through which the alleged funds moved. He said this evidence was placed before the magistrate but was not considered.

Nandago is accused of money laundering involving N$500 000. Katjivena said it is not clear who paid the money and argued there is no proof beyond reasonable doubt that his client made the payment. 
Boris Isaacks, representing former Namcor managing director Immanuel Mulunga, challenged the state's reliance on "public interest" as a ground for denying bail.

Isaacks told the court the concept has no clear definition in law.
He argued the magistrate accepted the state's reliance on public interest without demanding clarity.

Isaacks said the magistrate placed weight on public interest without requiring a definition.

Gilroy Kasper, representing Olivia Dunaiski, told the court the magistrate accepted poor evidence from the ACC investigator. 

He said the magistrate found Dunaiski to be truthful but still denied her bail.
Kasper said Dunaiski's affidavit was not challenged, noting that the bail ruling amounted to a miscarriage of justice.

Mbanga Siumunji, representing Jennifer Hamukwaya, argued the magistrate erred in finding that his client contradicted herself during her evidence.

He rejected the claim that Enercon Namibia, owned by the Elindis, received special treatment from Hamukwaya while she served on Namcor's credit committee.
State advocate Basson Lilungwe will submit his arguments on Friday on why the state is opposing