• Home

Audit Director Testifies
against Mizin Ex-CEO

Mohammed Mustafa Hussein, director of the Audit Department of the Ruler’s Court, confirmed in the Court of First Instance that the former CEO granted such facilities, thus breaching the trust bestowed on him by his company. “He committed the violations on purpose while he was entrusted with taking good care of Mizin’s interests. None has ever thought that he would breach the policy of Tatweer and inflict damage on the interests of both Mizin and Tatweer,” Hussein testified.

The 50-year-old former top brass of Mizin had earlier pleaded not guilty to taking about Dh2 million in bribes from a Lebanese engineer (also on trial) who in turn is said to have received purchase discounts adding up to Dh49 million.

The ex-CEO allegedly breached the company policy and abused his powers during his tenure in 2006-2007 when he granted the Lebanese some facilities and privileges, including staggered payment of installment and less down payment, without overcharge, in return for bribes.

The 53-year-old Lebanese is accused of bribing the CEO to avail of discounts and facilities while purchasing land and built-up units. He had earlier denied conspiring with the ex-CEO to serve their mutual interests while damaging the company’s.

Hussein told the court that discounts are sometimes granted to customers in purchase deals but they would be upon a well-studied plan. “Discounts are subject to many factors including the space of the bought land, the plot’s price, other conditions of the purchase deal and the customers’ qualifications. Each transaction or deal is examined separately. Not every discount is considered a violation. Sometimes discounts are offered to attract investments. They are good in a way to sell all plots of the project,” the auditor said.

However, what happened in this case was an explicit infringement on the part of the ex-CEO as the Lebanese defendant was not qualified to avail of the discounts and facilities according to the Tatweer guidelines, he added.

Lawyer of the ex-CEO Samir Jaafar argued that plots were sold to the Lebanese defendant at higher prices than to other customers. Besides, the amount his client allegedly took in bribe was actually the collection of dues owed by clients of a factory owned by the ex-CEO and the Lebanese just deposited the amount in the factory’s bank account.

He also argued that the alleged violations by his client were spotted before the benefits he had allegedly availed of. “Does that mean that the former CEO committed administrative violations or abuse of power as he was not referred for that to the Public Prosecution?” Jaafar asked.

Replying to that, Hussein maintained that the former CEO was surely to be referred to the Public Prosecution even before his company found out about the benefits he had got. In the next hearing slated for March 9, Ali Shamsy, representing the Lebanese defendant, will quiz the same witness.

mary@khaleejtimes.com

• UAE