Lebanese shipbuilder Privinvest was refused permission on Tuesday 10 December to appeal Mozambique’s victory in a court case in London, UK, over the decade-old ‘tuna bonds’ scandal, Reuters reported.
According to the agency, the country sued Privinvest and its late owner Iskandar Safa, alleging that they paid bribes to state officials and Credit Suisse bankers to secure favourable conditions for three projects in 2013 and 2014, including one to exploit Mozambique’s tuna-rich coastal waters.
The High Court in London ruled in July that Mozambique was entitled to payment of just over 52.14 billion meticals (825 million dollars) from Iskandar Safa and the companies in the Privinvest group. In addition, the country won compensation of around 94.8 billion meticals (1.5 billion dollars) in the same case, apart from 26.5 billion meticals (420 million dollars) already recovered by the country.
The court refused Privinvest authorisation to appeal the decision, although the company can appeal directly to the Court of Appeal. The company’s lawyer has already said that he intends to submit an appeal.
The hundreds of millions of dollars that were supposed to support national projects disappeared and, when the public debt came to light in 2016, donors like the International Monetary Fund temporarily suspended support, triggering a currency collapse, defaults and financial turmoil.
Mozambique’s case was also brought against Credit Suisse, which has since been acquired by UBS (UBSG.S), which reached a settlement with Mozambique in October, before reaching an understanding with Privinvest during the trial, allowing the lender to draw a line under the scandal.
The hidden debts scandal dates back to 2013 and 2014, when the then finance minister, Manuel Chang, now in detention in the United States, approved state guarantees on loans from ProInducus, Ematum and MAM to the banks Credit Suisse and VTB in absentia.
Discovered in 2016, the debts were estimated at 170.6 billion meticals (2.7 billion dollars), according to figures presented by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
The trial was the culmination of almost four years of litigation in the British courts, to which the country appealed, alleging corruption, conspiracy to defraud by unlawful means and dishonest assistance to cancel debts and claim financial compensation worth millions of dollars.
