Durban - Cleared of all fraud charges involving the construction of a R142 million laundry at Durban’s Prince Mshiyeni Hospital, Durban businessman Elias Mechanicos says he intends suing those who wrongly accused him.
In his sights is the forensic auditing company which, a Durban magistrate found on the evidence before her, had not conducted its probe into the award of the tender by the Department of Public Works to him in an impartial manner.
“I have instructed my attorneys to take action against the company and the parties responsible for my unfounded arrest and prosecution,” the businessman said in a written statement to The Mercury.
He was arrested in December last year and was released on R300 000 bail. The gist of the fraud charges against him was that he had been awarded the contract to build the laundry, but, through the appointment of sub-contractors, had inflated the price by 20% to his benefit.
Mechanicos said at the time of his arrest he did not respond publicly to the allegations but had ensured a speedy trial - which ended last month.
“During the State’s evidence it became apparent there was no foundation to the charge.
“The department’s chief financial officer confirmed that the department was always aware of the facts relating to the appointment of the sub-contractor, the sub-contractor’s tender price as well as my own,” Mechanicos said.
After the State’s case was closed, the accused applied for a discharge and was acquitted.
In her ruling, magistrate P Naidoo described the evidence of the sub-contractors as unreliable and said it contained many discrepancies.
She said some of their statements contained exactly the same wording.
“The court gained the impression that the evidence was largely steered in a certain direction by the forensic investigators who clearly, on the evidence of the State witnesses, confirmed this by making suggestions to them after the investigation started.”
She said one witness, for example, had said he initially understood the 20% to be the contractors’ mark-up, but while being interviewed by the forensic investigator, he was asked if this was not an inflation of the tender price and he then reconsidered his view.
“Investigators are supposed to conduct investigations in an impartial manner to get to the truth of what actually transpired,” the magistrate said.
“The accused’s version - that the tender price was increased by the accused to cover his risk and this was normal procedure - was confirmed by some of the State witnesses,” she said.
The Mercury