INSIGHT INTO STATE vs TIENSTEN, KAVO & POTAPE
By BRYAN KRAMER Part 3.1 Comparison and Analysis of the three Cases Paul Tiensten was convicted and sentenced to 9 years for the charge of misappropriation when he dishonestly applied K10m to Travel Air as seed capital when the funds were committed for rural airfreight subsidy. Tiensten filed an appeal in the Supreme Court which was eventually dismissed. Tiensten's case was unique where his mere direction in his capacity as the Minister to the officers of Department of National Planning & Monitoring to facilitate the release of the K10m payment to Travel Air was sufficient to convict him. Some readers believe the Courts erred in finding Tiensten guilty and raise a number of arguments in his defence such as: 1) It was never proven Tiensten benefited from the K10m proceeds. 2) The element of control of the property - in this case the K10m - was not with the Minister but with the Secretary who is the Section 32 Officer. A Section 32 Officer, as per the Finance Management Act, is