The second hearing of the case pitting the State of Cameroon against Tchakounte Joseph, Mankollo Ekomba Guillaum and Mouengue Massoma Samuel took place at the Special Criminal Court in Yaounde yesterday May 7, 2013.
The accused are charged with embezzling State funds and the use of fake documents. Tchakounte Joseph is accused of embezzling FCFA 81,429,250, Mouengue Massoma Samuel, FCFA 14, 4900 and Mankollo Ekomba Guillaume, FCFA 8,500,000. Yesterday's session focused on the submissions of the prosecution.
Advocate General, Didier Edjisna said between January 2009 and April 2010, Tchakounte Joseph was financial clerk at the weighing station in Dibombari, Littoral Region. Mouengue Massoma Samuel was at the treasury in Dibombari while Mankollo Ekomba Guillaume was in charge of the programme for road safety. The Advocate General explained that the source of income in the weighing station is through fines such as overloading. For a fine to be effective, it must be registered. The driver pays a fine and he is given a receipt. The sum collected is given to the financial clerk who then deposits the money at the Dibombari treasury. At the level of the treasury, he is given a receipt to justify the deposit.
Didier Edjisna said it was however noticed that there was a divergence between the payment at the weighing station and the deposit in the treasury in Dibombari. Instead of justifying money deposited in the treasury in Dibombari, Tchakounte Joseph presented fake justifications. The money, according to the Advocate General, was only going into his pocket. He cited fake receipts such as Receipt Number 22074025 and Receipt Number 22074024 of January 2010.
The Advocate General said the numbers of the receipts do not correspond to the serial number of the receipt booklet of Dibombari treasury. "That is why Tchakounte succeeded in embezzling money in Dibombari with two of his accomplices," he said. The Receipt Number 82076036 of May 31, 2009 singed by Mouengue Massoma was also fake. As for Mankollo Ekomba, the receipts to justify payment into the State coffers were fake because the serial number was not the same with that of Dibombari treasury.
Barrister Sylvestre Nah Nah who stood as civil claimant brought in more evidence to prove that Tchakounte and co-accused were guilty. He said the stamp which was no longer in use in Bekoko and was still being used was an evidence of fraud. Also, he mentioned the use of fake bills and the collection money from drivers without paying into the public treasury. Barrister Nah Nah said Tchakounte Joseph had fake receipt booklets which were found in Bekoko. "He was the supplier of the fake receipts," he said.
After listening to the submissions, the court gave the accused three options to choose for their defence according to the article 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The first was that he may make a statement in his defence not on oath, the second that he may say nothing and the third that he may give evidence on oath as witness. The accused chose the first option. The defence lawyers opted to be given time to prepare their defence. The case was adjourned to May 21, 2013 for the defence to prepare their defence.
