The State has started with its argument for aggravation, disagreeing with former education minister Katrina Hanse-Himarwa’s lawyer, Sisa Namandje, who said the two people whose names were removed benefitted later from phase-two of the project. According to State prosecutor, Advocate ED Marondedze the two people who benefitted at a later stage was accommodated because one of the witnesses, who was in the meeting with Hanse-Himarwa, felt pity for the removed beneficiaries. He further said the State is fighting for zero tolerance on corruption. Maybe this case may cause the big fishes to be caught because one of the big fish has been caught, Marondedze told Judge Christie Liebenberg. Marondedze says the action of the former minister, leading to the conviction, cannot be justified by any explanation. He further said although the defence counsel indicated the accused is sorry for crime she committed, she told the media her views are different from the views of the judge which shows no remorse. He said her having served in the capacity of minister shows that she knows the judiciary system. Referring to the court decision as “just another view” of the case and her having a different opinion is just unacceptable. The State prosecutor requested the court to relook the claims of the accused being removed for the wrongdoings with what she indicated to the media of saying the judgement is nothing to her and of course she plans to appeal. We have evidence that she has extra income apart from her ministerial salary. One of the witnesses told the court they are partners in two fishing companies with fishing rights. According to the State, the reduction of salary to that of an ordinary MP will not affect her financial status in any way. Marondedze further said the former minister has tarnished the name of the Government and the President who nominated her for finding herself on the other side of the law. The State argued that corruption defeats the purpose of good governance. Advocate Marondedze said as the Governor she should have maintained good governance by reporting any irregularities detected to the Head of State but rather she took a decision that benefits her close relatives. He further said the offense committed is serious and if it was not for her position as Governor she would have not made that decision.