Connect with us

Southern Africa

The President&DMH exposed by Mupasiri



On 19 December 2021, Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri, a Harare resident, launched a landmark case in terms of s167(2)(d) and s167(3) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe seeking the Constitutional Court to determine whether the President’s refusal and failure to respond to his letter dated 9 November 2021, constituted a failure to fulfill his oath of office and whether his conduct as alleged by Manikai, his attorney, is consistent with his constitutional promise.

On 24 December 2021, the President responded to the application. Manikai, who was cited as the Second Respondent, opposed the application although no relief was sought against him.

Mr. Mupasiri said: “I only cited Manikai in the application given that my application was provoked by the scandalous and malicious allegations he made against the President. The President assumed office in November 2017 against a backdrop of widespread outrage against corruption. He has committed himself to fighting corruption without favor or prejudice. When he invoked President Mnangagwa in the ReconGate matter involving the outsourcing of the AG’s functions to the firm, DMH Attorneys, my concern of state capture was heightened, and could find no better options than to approach the court to allow Manikai to confirm that his allegations that President Mnangagwa was the driving force behind the demise of SMM Holdings Limited (SMM) using one of the most draconian laws in the world, I was expecting that Manikai would simply assist the court.”

He continued as follows: “This morning, an interesting conversation ensued in which the position taken by a judge who was not named in a letter addressed to Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri, the Applicant, in a matter challenging the President’s refusal and failure to act in relation to a major corruption scandal that Manikai alleged was authored by President Mnangagwa.

He continued to state: “I was inspired by President Mnangagwa who on 1 August 2021 was reported to have stated in an article published by the Standard Newspaper How committed is Mnangagwa to eradication of corruption? – The Standard (newsday.co.zw) is as follows:

  1. The fight against corruption requires a multi-stakeholder approach to succeed.
  2. The government has a key and catalytic role play among other invaluable key stakeholders in the fight against corruption.
  3. These other social partners include the media, civil society and the international organisations.
  4. On that note he threw the ball literally back into the court of players other than his own government.
  5. My government stands committed to the establishment of democratic, transparent, accountable, strong and efficient institutions in our great country.
  6. The interests of our people and nation must always come first.

to launch this application in the Constitutional Court as part of my civic duty to build a governance system based on the respect of the rule of law. Notwithstanding the numerous warnings discouraging me from launching this application, I believe that history will be kind to me for being the first Zimbabwean after the introduction of the 2013 Constitution to seek to make the President accountable and as to make his choices and conduct subject to public scrutiny. For this, I have no regrets and believe that justice must prevail based on the truth.”

It was refreshing that a conversation ensued in a What’sApp group that I belong to based on the position taken by a judge who was not named in a letter addressed to Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri, the Applicant, in a matter challenging the President’s refusal and failure to act in relation to a major corruption scandal that Manikai alleged was authored by President Mnangagwa.

It is not in dispute that Manikai on 27 March 2021, stated as true and fact that the decision to divest the shareholders of SMM Holdings Private Limited (SMMH) was part of a fightback strategy following what he described as a major political fallout between Mawere and President Mnangagwa.

It is fact that Mupasiri wrote letters to both Manikai and President Mnangagwa on 8 and 9 November 2021, respectively, expecting a frank and candid record of the President’s state of knowledge regarding the malicious and scandalous attack by Manikai against the integrity of the President.

Manikai said that Mawere was punished for taking sides with Mujuru during the Tsholotsho power struggle and he justifies the destruction of so many jobs as a warning to anyone who stands in the way of the President Mnangagwa.

Following the refusal and failure of President Mnangagwa and Manikai to respond, Mupasiri approached the Constitutional Court to determine whether the alleged role of the President is consistent with his duties, especially having regard to the reality that under his Presidency, this repugnant law has been enforced in relation to entities like Air Zimbabwe and Hwange Colliery Company Limited.

With respect to Air Zimbabwe, the President openly justified his appointment of Chinamasa as Chairman of Air Zimbabwe at a time when the company’s control and management had been divested from the company’s shareholders and directors.

With respect to Hwange, it is not in dispute that Justice Mangota rebuked Minister Ziyambi for unilaterally and arbitrarily issuing a vacuous order against the company.

Ziyambi has appealed the Mangota order but the fact that this rebuke was made is significant in that for the first time, a judicial officer has spoken about this law that offends public policy to be regarded as law at all.

Ziyambi had approached the court to confirm and not determine the legality of public morality that permits the role of the court to be reduced to that of confirming Ministerial limiting orders.

It has turned out that Mupasiri when he learned that Manikai, a Second Respondent, in his application had opposed the application and asked the court to impose higher costs against him to discourage others from asserting constitutional rights as provided for in the constitution from using the intermediation of the courts; applied for the court to determine whether the opposition by the President was authorized especially having regard to the fact that the Attorney General was not involved in the engagement of DMH directly by the President.

Secondly, Mupasiri has sought the intervention of the Court to determine if Manikai is fit and proper to continue practicing law given the despicable and criminal role Manikai has played in undermining the rule of law.

To the extent that the President has sought to protect Manikai in his opposing affidavit, Mupasiri believes that it would not be in the interests of justice for his original application to be prosecuted without affording Manikai to give the court his own narrative in response to the facts that are now before the court.

It is fact that the matter has been set down for hearing on 9 March 2022 and Mupasiri has been directed by the Registrar of the Court to file his Heads of Argument to allow the Respondents to file their own heads.

Mupasiri in response has applied to set aside this directive pending the determination of his application challenging the authority to oppose his main application and also after the court has determined the challenge of the fitness of Manikai and his firm to act as an agent of the President in a matter in which his conduct and that of the firm are part of the subject matter of the dispute.

After filing and serving the Respondents, Mupasiri was informed that his applications are to be heard together with the main application resulting in an interesting exchange of correspondences between the Registrar and Mupasiri.

Mupasiri already smelling a rat and bias of the courts has refused to file heads in a matter that had been preceded by events that he had no knowledge of.

He argues that he never sought any relief against Manikai believing that as an officer of Court, the search of the truth and justice in its ventilation would encourage Manikai to come clean on his role in prosecuting a law that defies logic and is patently evil and satanic.

Regrettably, it would appear the highest court in the land is already being used as a weapon to defeat this landmark application that is in the interests of justice.

Below is a thread of conversations on this dispute that has allowed a judge of the Court to exempt the President and Manikai from complying with the rule of court.

[1/30, 8:52 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 7:32 AM] JUROL00059: That is a start. Have you read @⁨Prof Mupasiri⁩’s court application that has provoked a nameless and shameless judge to expose himself and the complicity of the judiciary is aiding and abetting corruption?
[1/30, 7:33 AM] JUROL00013: No sir …
[1/30, 7:33 AM] +27 79 448 7609: Our Prof e group anoita nezwei
[1/30, 7:33 AM] JUROL00059: Are you interested in learning?
[1/30, 7:33 AM] JUROL00013: 🙈🙉🙊
[1/30, 7:33 AM] JUROL00013: I am
[1/30, 7:34 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that the world is full of bullshit professors and yet the real professor of life is living it.
[1/30, 7:36 AM] JUROL00059: Please let me know so that I can share the response to this letter.
[1/30, 7:40 AM] JUROL00059: Should the platform not be used to promote and provoke new perspectives and not the vehicles used to get to statehouses?
[1/30, 7:41 AM] JUROL00013: Ndaraswa hangu ne latin apo bit it seems as if judge arikuti application iyi is not that urgent or groundbreaking so ED can respond innthe ‘normal’ mannr which can take years? Correct me pandaresva hangu sir
[1/30, 7:42 AM] JUROL00059: Do you want to read @⁨Prof Mupasiri⁩’s reply?
[1/30, 7:42 AM] JUROL00013: Perspectives work best WHEN one is IN state house i think…
[1/30, 7:42 AM] JUROL00013: Yes please kkk
[1/30, 7:46 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that the pathway to statehouse is the most treacherous and divisive one?
[1/30, 7:47 AM] JUROL00059: Read and let me know your thoughts.
[1/30, 7:52 AM] JUROL00013: Done. Prof is right apa something smells fishy. The judge SHOULD identify him or herself and give satisfactory reasons for his or her decisions.

This is why i say the best way to change things is to change the entire system. This matter will drag on and on until prof gives up or runs out of legal funds.
[1/30, 7:52 AM] JUROL00013: Not necessarily
[1/30, 7:53 AM] JUROL00059: Did you know of this development?
[1/30, 7:58 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that many citizens also don’t know what may be public in order for them to improve governance and be vigilant?
[1/30, 7:59 AM] JUROL00013: They don’t unfortunately. .. maybe we need a new type of newspaper kkkk
[1/30, 8:01 AM] JUROL00059: Should it be MAYBE or do citizens need information in order to decide what to do?

Are you not angry after you read the exchange?
[1/30, 8:03 AM] JUROL00013: I am always angry politically bcoz all this has been caused by Zanu pf
[1/30, 8:05 AM] JUROL00059: Are you interested in reading my thread with @⁨Prof Mupasiri⁩ on this matter?
[1/30, 8:07 AM] JUROL00013: Yes
[1/30, 8:08 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 7:24 AM] JUROL00059: After reading the Registrar’s letter, what would be your questions to the nation?

What should be the headline?
[1/30, 7:28 AM] JUROL00011: When a referee becomes one of the players in a contending team: The case of the Zimbabwean judiciary.
[1/30, 7:30 AM] JUROL00059: Do we have proof that the Registrar has assumed the role of the referee?
[1/30, 7:34 AM] JUROL00011: It’s there in that letter where he assumes spokesmanship of the Respondents and had already looked into the papers having his own determination prior to the court sitting.
[1/30, 7:37 AM] JUROL00059: What if the judge in motion is recommending that since the issues you raise can be conveniently dealt with in your own cause rather than outside it?
[1/30, 7:41 AM] JUROL00011: He can’t recommend that which the respondents must say in writing. Why does he want the respondents to answer to the questions raised in the two documents he mentioned?

The judiciary is conflicted
[1/30, 7:45 AM] JUROL00059: Is the word can’t the appropriate one? What if the judge says that efficiency and convenience are key and that your case falls or rises on your founding papers?

Is it not your founding case that the President violated his duties provoking you to seek the court’s intervention?

Is it not true that the burden to prove your allegations lies with the alleged and the Respondent has no obligation to you to disprove your case?
[1/30, 7:49 AM] JUROL00011: And that I gave to the same court.

It is clear in the letter by the judge and the one I received from Manikai that a tag team (respondents-judiciary) has been officiated.

It is not surprising if Manikai actually drafts those letters on behalf of the court.

It is not surprising if Manikai actually drafts those letters on behalf of the court.
[1/30, 7:50 AM] JUROL00059: Is this not an allegation?
[1/30, 7:51 AM] JUROL00011: It’s an allegation on Manikai and not on the judiciary
[1/30, 7:51 AM] JUROL00059: What evidence do you have to prove that your allegation is true?
[1/30, 7:52 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that the normal process is that a founding affidavit, is followed by an answering affidavit and then by a replying affidavit?
[1/30, 8:11 AM] +27 74 354 5808: You have a way of searching for the truth kkkkk. Very interesting. . So you are saying prof is powerless to change events as they are now?
[1/30, 8:12 AM] JUROL00059: What is your reading?
[1/30, 8:13 AM] JUROL00059: Another view:

[1/30, 7:52 AM] JUROL00022: What happened to the court application
[1/30, 8:07 AM] JUROL00022: Is this how the court operates?
[1/30, 8:09 AM] JUROL00059: Have you read this?
[1/30, 8:09 AM] JUROL00022: Yes
[1/30, 8:10 AM] JUROL00022: Why is the lead judge faceless and nameless
[1/30, 8:12 AM] JUROL00059: Is it not a fact that the identity of the judge is not disclosed?

How did this judge know about the existence of the 2 interlocutory applications?

Can or should litigation be conducted by correspondence?

1/30, 8:18 AM] JUROL00013: I think prof should seek to have his case handled by another judge
[1/30, 8:18 AM] JUROL00013: I’m commenting generally by the way. No legal training etc
[1/30, 8:18 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that for him to seek recusal, he must know the judge?
[1/30, 8:19 AM] JUROL00013: Yesssss. . Bit that might be problematic since the sid judge does not want to be known kkkk
[1/30, 8:19 AM] JUROL00013: Said*
[1/30, 8:22 AM] JUROL00059: Then how can @⁨Prof Mupasiri⁩ seek a remedy on something that falls outside his personal knowledge?

What if the opponent drafted the letter and connived with the Registrar as a strategy to win the case and ensure that the President’s state of knowledge on corruption under his watch or his buddies is never subjected to public scrutiny?

What if the opponent drafted the letter and connived with the Registrar as a strategy to win the case and ensure that the President’s state of knowledge on corruption under his watch or his buddies is never subjected to public scrutiny?
[1/30, 8:24 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 8:14 AM] JUROL00022: Why were the 2 interlocutory applications not saved to the court?
Litigation can’t be by correspondence hence my previous question as to how the court operates
[1/30, 8:16 AM] JUROL00059: Does the Registrar not expose himself by acknowledging the existence of served papers that apparently are in the possession of this faceless and nameless judge?
[1/30, 8:18 AM] JUROL00022: I have no idea as to the court processes and procedures.
[1/30, 8:19 AM] JUROL00059: But what do natural justice and the rule of law demand?

Would you expect a referee to be the coach as well?

Would you expect a referee to be the coach as well?
[1/30, 8:20 AM] JUROL00022: It demands fairness and transparency
[1/30, 8:23 AM] JUROL00059: Do you think the judge should read the papers and act on them outside the four corners of a court hearing?
[1/30, 8:26 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 7:51 AM] JUROL00011: It’s an allegation on Manikai and not on the judiciary
[1/30, 7:51 AM] JUROL00059: What evidence do you have to prove that your allegation is true?
[1/30, 7:52 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that the normal process is that a founding affidavit, is followed by an answering affidavit and then by a replying affidavit?
[1/30, 8:14 AM] JUROL00011: The proof is the letter which I received from the court.

Its contents bare it all

Its contents bare it all
[1/30, 8:16 AM] JUROL00059: Is there anything that proves that the court is approaching the issues subjectively?
[1/30, 8:19 AM] JUROL00011: Yes I agree but my application is a unique one with no precedence to refer to.

Everything is new, which may even lead the courts to revise their processes.

Even the elect in the legal profession is finding it new.

There is a need to remember that my Interlocutory application was rejected twice before being accepted reason being the court wanted time to research what it really was.

After their research and calls by some in FoSMM demanding reasons for the rejection, the courts eventually accepted the papers.

After their research and calls by some in FoSMM demanding reasons for the rejection, the courts eventually accepted the papers.

After their research and calls by some in FoSMM demanding reasons for the rejection, the courts eventually accepted the papers.

After their research and calls by some in FoSMM demanding reasons for the rejection, the courts eventually accepted the papers.
[1/30, 8:21 AM] JUROL00011: According to the letter, the court has already determined the matter before it even sits
[1/30, 8:23 AM] JUROL00059: Did the court not allow you to file the papers?
[1/30, 8:27 AM] JUROL00013: That is exactly the case kkkk
[1/30, 8:27 AM] JUROL00059: What is the case?
[1/30, 8:27 AM] +27 78 261 2454: Kurwadziwa na yellow nation kusvika pakunyora novel
[1/30, 8:28 AM] JUROL00013: That the opponent drafted the letter and connived with the Registrar as a strategy to win the case and ensure that the President’s state of knowledge on corruption under his watch or his buddies is never subjected to public scrutiny.
[1/30, 8:30 AM] JUROL00059: Should this not be tested with facts?
[1/30, 8:32 AM] JUROL00013: Well nigh impossible
[1/30, 8:32 AM] JUROL00059: Are you aware that DMH is representing both Manikai and the President?
[1/30, 9:52 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 9:12 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 8:20 AM] JUROL00022: It demands fairness and transparency
[1/30, 8:23 AM] JUROL00059: Do you think the judge should read the papers and act on them outside the four corners of a court hearing?
[1/30, 8:25 AM] JUROL00022: It should be at the trial.
[1/30, 8:26 AM] JUROL00059: Do you then smell a rat?
[1/30, 8:28 AM] JUROL00022: I will give them the benefit of doubt but with caution. Let’s first see how it goes at the trial.
[1/30, 8:30 AM] JUROL00059: What if the issues raised in the interlocutory applications are vital for the Applicant to decide whether he should amend his papers or abandon the cause?
[1/30, 9:01 AM] JUROL00022: From my little experience on the cases I have been involved in from the technical side. We receive papers from the litigant then we respond. If the litigant will then request clarification and or supporting documents based on our responses and we do so but if we don’t think it’s necessary, we don’t do so. Usually, such areas will become disputed by both parties at the beginning of the trial, and the party that fails to defend its position will bear the consequences. One cannot keep on amending an application or submitting unlimited interlocutors
[1/30, 9:08 AM] JUROL00059: Should the access to courts be limited and prescribed so as to prevent the courts from being provided with all the facts necessary to dispose of a matter?
[1/30, 9:52 AM] JUROL00059: [1/30, 8:36 AM] JUROL00011: It eventually did allow me to so which I did successfully on the 25th of January 2022 after a double failed attempt.

Had it been in the hands of some lazy legal minds, the interlocutory could have suffered a stillbirth at the hands of the supposed midwives of justice.

The court eventually saw the light.

The rejection is not in my words but in what is tangible.

When the second rejection was made, I went ahead to serve the same copies (2) of the interlocutory to the respondents which are shown by the two DMH stamping and DMH was indeed at the Concourt on the morning of January 25th, 2022 to query my serving of papers with no court stamp😂

When the second rejection was made, I went ahead to serve the same copies (2) of the interlocutory to the respondents which are shown by the two DMH stamping and DMH was indeed at the Concourt on the morning of January 25th, 2022 to query my serving of papers with no court stamp😂
[1/30, 8:39 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that your papers are before the court and were duly served to the Respondents?
[1/30, 8:54 AM] JUROL00011: I agree
[1/30, 8:54 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that no one is above the law?
[1/30, 9:01 AM] JUROL00011: I agree, absolutely
[1/30, 9:05 AM] JUROL00059: What is the import of the directions of the nameless judge?!
[1/30, 9:06 AM] JUROL00059: Does it not suggest that the Respondents are not subject to the limitations imposed on all litigants to abide by the rules of court?
[1/30, 9:06 AM] JUROL00059: Should the Respondents be exempted in the mind of the nameless judge?
[1/30, 9:10 AM] JUROL00011: He)she (judge) does not want to be accountable for his instruction and writing.

Even if there is a need to write for recusal of the judge from my case, I will end up writing for the recusal of the entire bench and call for Judges for hire like Judge Joe Brown😂😂

It implies that the judge did so under instruction that could be against the dictates of his profession hence his deliberate choice for his namelessness.

Judges are slaves too, exhibiting that there is no equality in the arms of government.

Judges are slaves too, exhibiting that there is no equality in the arms of government.
[1/30, 9:11 AM] JUROL00011: Not at all. Rule and regulation must be applied to all and fairly.
[1/30, 9:13 AM] JUROL00059: In this case, is it not the case that the nameless judge has already exempted the Respondents from responding to the allegations in your interlocutory applications?
[1/30, 9:18 AM] JUROL00011: It is evident that he did.

Who knows maybe one of the Respondents is the very nameless judge… it can’t be the whole CC writing the letter

[1/30, 9:22 AM] JUROL00059: Would this not constitute a malicious and scandalous attack on the judiciary?
[1/30, 9:26 AM] JUROL00011: Then the court must unmask the judge who did write to me to demystify that thought in not only my head but that of many discerning individuals who care about justice delivery.
[1/30, 9:27 AM] JUROL00011: proper justice delivery based on fairness and transparency
[1/30, 9:27 AM] JUROL00059: Do you agree that the rights of litigants in search of the truth are at the core of this leg of the dispute?
[1/30, 9:29 AM] JUROL00011: I agree
[1/30, 9:31 AM] JUROL00059: What should be the beginning of this discovery using your case?
[1/30, 9:36 AM] JUROL00011: The rejection of the interlocutory papers by the registrar of Concourt on January 20th and 24th 2022 when the registrar should be to accept and leave the courts to determine.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Who has title to decide to prosecute civil or constitutional questions on behalf of the President?



In the matter under Case Number CCZ 34/21, the Applicant, Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri, launched his application and served it at the Attorney General’s office believing that s114 of the Constitution was applicable.

Mr. Mupasiri explains the reason and logic behind the targeted Respondents as follows:

“At the time, I launched the application, I will alive to the background and reason why s167 is limited to the apex court’s exclusive jurisdiction in determining the merits or demerits of a complaint regarding the breach of a constitutional duty imposed specifically on the President as the constitutional head of the government of Zimbabwe.

I knew that no President who is not conflicted would miss any opportunity to correct a record that may exist with or without his knowledge regarding his conduct.

I wrote a letter to Manikai, the author of the utterances made in a chat with Mr. Fred Mutanda on 27 March 2021 or after 17 years of the placement of SMM under the control of an Administrator appointed by Chinamasa in his capacity as a purported representative of a creditor of SMM.

It was alleged that SMM was indebted to the state solely because its ultimate beneficial shareholder, the person of Mr. Mutumwa Mawere had diverted SMM’s export proceeds in SA resulting in SMM being forced to borrow funds from the state.

If this version was true and fact, I reckoned that any bona fide creditor, would not need the agency of a Minister of Justice to assist in debt collection when such an eventuality of a defaulting debtor is a common occurrence in relation to companies as going concerns.

I could not find any justification for the actors like Chinamasa using public power to create facts and circumstances in respect of a debtor like SMM being targeted by creating a special law providing for a creditor in the name of the state being clothed with powers to self-help and benefit from a law specifically crafted to create a new class of corporate citizenship in the name of the state.

After the revelations by Manikai, I took an interest in better understanding the facts and circumstances that informed the decision to divest and deprive shareholders of SMM in the manner that unfolded the abortive attempt to extradite Mawere from SA to Zimbabwe in May 2004.

The more I tried to understand the facts the more the knowledge I obtained from pedestrian sources did not make sense.

This called for me to use the FOSMM and JUROL platforms to reach out to Mr. Mawere and others who possessed personal knowledge to help respond to the frequently asked questions as follows:

When I chose to seek refuge in s167 of the Constitution as the appropriate point of departure in my quest for the truth, it never dawned on that the President was going to be involved and impose his power and authority to have a conflicted person like Manikai get the agency to defend him.

It is specifically provided that one of the functions of the AG is to represent the government in all civil and constitutional proceedings.

On 24 December 2021, I was served with two affidavits one that was deposed to by the President opposing my application and the second one by Manikai.

I already knew that my application had already been thrown to the wolves by President Mnangagwa who I expected to treat my complaint with the seriousness it calls for.

Regrettably, this opportunity was squandered by the President. This resulted in my taking the next step of writing directly to DMH to establish whether the decision by the President was facilitated by the office of the AG or the President had unilaterally engaged DMH using public resources.

I wrote a letter dated 27 December 2021 naively believing that following rules and the law is what would ordinarily guide a lawyer, I was surprised that DMH ignored my gesture completely.

The next thing is that DMH had gotten the attention of a nameless and faceless judge who directed that matter be set down for hearing on 9 March 2022 even before resolving the authority question that I had flagged.

It was already obvious that the outcome of my application could already have been predetermined.

Following the receipt of the letter informing me that the hearing of this dispute had already been set down, I immediately launched an interlocutory application seeking the relief set out below:

It is clear from the above that the issue of authority was central to my application seeking a declaration by the Court setting out the procedures including the limitations imposed by the constitution in respect of engaging private law firms in providing external services in relation to litigations of the kind I launched.

I only got the answer from Mr. Gondogwa on behalf of DMH’s clients, the President, and Mr. Manikai, in response to Mawere’s challenge regarding his recusal application, that DMH had been appointed by the President to defend him with public resources.

However, the facts of the matter speak to a completely different narrative that the decision by the President to oppose my s167 application was made without the knowledge and involvement of the office of the AG.

It was only after realizing that I had raised the issue that an attempt was made by correspondences to mislead the court into believing that DMH’s agency was procured by the AG when this is false.

My experiences since launching my application confirm that DMH’s relationship with the President does not fall into the category of attorney to client realm.”


This is a question for our readers to comment in the quest to create a Zimbabwe that is accountable and transparent.

Continue Reading





The 1873 Network in collaboration with the Africa Heritage Society (AHS) is pleased to announce that Mr. Tichaona Mupasiri (TM), has been inducted into the Banking on Africa’s Future (BOAF) – 10,000 Points of Light (POL) for his outstanding contribution to the building of an open, accountable, and transparent constitutional order in Zimbabwe.

Mr. Jagjit Singh, the Director of the BOAF – 10,000 POL initiative said: “I am pleased to have a person of courage and conviction like Mr. Mupasiri into our community of shapers of Africa that we are all yearning for.

The reality in many African states is that public trust has eroded drastically in the post-colonial era yet there exists very few people prepared to take any step forward to hold people in public offices to account for their conduct in government.

The fact that there exists no shared understanding of what good governance is and is not, compels all of us to take notice of the role that individuals like Mr. Mupasiri play in shaping and defining a new personality of Africa that remains elusive.

I am particularly encouraged that a new consciousness is developing in countries like Zimbabwe that adds value to our collective search for the kind of state craftsmanship that is value-centric and servant orientated.”

Mr. Frederick Koomson, Director of the Public Engagement initiative of JUROL said: “Justice and truth are friends yet rarely do we encounter public office bearers who are willing and prepared to put the public in their confidence in the exercise of their duties.

The quest for justice is our duty as citizens and we are all enjoined to promote, protect and uphold the rule of law.

I am excited that the foundation that we have already laid in the building a critical mass of people who are prepared to step forward and be the face of change that is missing will augur well for the promising future of Africa.”

Mr. Mupasiri said: “I am excited to be one of the lights in Africa and to be recognized for doing that which the constitution of my country expects me to do.

It is true that my application before the Constitutional Court of Zimbabwe has given visibility to the urgency and need for citizens to trade fear for active citizenship.

I hope this induction will help inspire others to use the available vehicles to test whether the promise entrenched in the Constitution that no one is above the law is alive and well.

I would rather die on my feet standing for what I believe in than on my knees begging for the rights and freedoms that are part of the constitutional promise.

Ms. Janice Greaver said: “When FOSMM launched an application to compel President Ramaphosa to take the necessary steps to ensure that the precedent set to recognize and enforce rights created by an act of state in Zimbabwe will never happen, I had no idea that this culture of using the courts to determine if the public office bearers are alive to their duties and promises would spread to Zimbabwe so fast.

Welcome, Mr. Mupasiri to the community of forward-leaning individuals.”

Continue Reading


Gwaradzimba 0 Mpasiri 1 – In search of Excellence



After nearly 42 years of independence, Zimbabwe has come a long way towards the ideal yet more could have been achieved if a shared understanding existed on what is needed to accelerate the pace of inclusive development.

The human equation in converting promises into outcomes can never be overstated. As part of the Banking on Africa’s Future (BOAF) – 10,000 Points of Light (POL) initiative, the promise, and challenges of building a corporate literate Africa is more pronounced in the absence of generally agreed standards to measure professional excellence among the human providers of service.

If you were asked to identify 5 people in Africa who stand out as Chartered Accountants (CAs), where would you start?

Some 6 years ago, a group of people came up together who shared a common interest in broadening and deepening understanding of corporate matters.

The Friends of SMM (FOSMM) was born about 6 years ago and a lot of information was shared with a view to promoting literacy of the rule of law using the facts and circumstances of SMM as a reference.

This has resulted in many people improving their appreciation that craft excellence is a product of problem-solving.

Mr. Afaras Gwaradzimba’s, a professional Chartered Accountant, relationship with SMM is best described by himself in his own words under oath as follows:

He then further stated that:

He worked for SMM as a private company and then plotted to hijack his former client with government officials.

Gwaradzimba’s profile on the AMG website is as set out below:

Based on the above, Gwaradzimba’s appointment to be Administrator of SMM was not preceded by any judicial proceedings but was a direct consequence of an administrative fiat or decree promulgated by the late President Mugabe using the force of law.

Ordinarily, Gwaradzimba would have been conflicted to accept the appointment whose effect was to attack the professional ethics that underpin the profession but because the system is so broken, the professional body that regulates the professionals is toothless if not dead.

Munyeza below captures the reality of the weaponization of the profession for personal benefit:

Gwaradzimba describes how he was appointed as SMM Administrator in the following words:

Gwaradzimba was appointed by Chinamasa and not by any court of law and shareholders of the company were not notified of the decision to divest them of the control of their company.

Below is what he stated:

Against the above, backdrop, Mr. Tinashe Mupasiri, a member of JUROL and FOSMM as well as a director of TAP Building Products Limited (TAP), a Zambian registered company that was hijacked by Gwaradzimba, and $1 million was siphoned from the company, shared a very interesting conversation he had with Gwaradzimba.

This conversation exposes the question that Gwaradzimba asked Mr. Mpasiri’s uncle as follows:

Gwaradzimba who would like his corruption using public power to be kept under wraps wanted to know if Mr. Mpasiri’s credentials as an accountant were authentic.

It is not unusual to find people who jealously guard their profession yet use it to undermine it. Below is the thread that you may use to test who is an Accountant you can bank on – Gwaradzimba v Mpasiri?

[7:11 am, 24/02/2022] mdmawere1: [2/22, 5:08 PM] Tinashe Mpasiri: [2:57 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: https://iniafrica.com/index.php/2022/02/22/gwaradzimba-exposed-in-a-money-laundering-racket-in-zambia/
[3:08 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Enjoy the words.
[3:15 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I am enjoying and I am also learning that the arch of the moral universe is long and bends towards justice under rule of law.
[3:20 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Inga zvako!!
[3:22 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: One day it will be a full circle with people you don’t know at all decide to just tarnish your image like you have decided to do with me. But, hey, it’s your time, enjoy as you’re doing.
[3:23 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: The online news media iniafrica.com is owned and run by MDM
[3:29 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I grew up thinking that unemployment, poverty, and inequality were caused by things that we don’t see.

I have come to learn that when individuals have no respect for the rule of law and no regard for property rights, economic development is a mirage and you have been party to undermining the future of many Zimbabweans.
[3:30 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I thought you finished MDM.

When are you paying back the money you stole from TAP?
[3:52 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Obviously you’re referring to someone or something else. Up to today, all my life has always been to do with the objective to achieve equality and freedom (this is what I believe to be what makes me), and one day you will know that. I will never go about disparaging anyone’s name, but just do my professional work as I should. And you will agree, you have and will never ever hear me publicly talk bad about you or anyone. And I think that’s the biggest difference between you and me. You’re everything – applicant/prosecutor/jury/judge. You have done everything required and have found me guilty to the extent you found it necessary to tell the world!!
[3:53 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: You stole money. Payback the money.
[3:56 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: I can hear words of you, something which makes me feel sorry for you, and even sympathize..
[4:00 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: How can you feel sorry for me when my fight is that, justice under rule of law be the heritage of the people of Zimbabwe and the rest of the African continent. You ought to feel sorry for yourself, masquerading with a CA badge, yet a criminal. Any criminal conduct is a disgrace to CA profession.
[4:12 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Mr. Gwaradzimba, I am a director of TAP and owe a fiduciary duty to the company I serve. You lied to me that SMM was a shareholder of TAP and you were required by the Reconstruction Act to pursue all the assets deemed to be SMM assets. The facts are known to you today and in 2004 have not changed. In short, there was never a shareholding relationship between TAP and SMM as you told me. What is your legal justification of asserting a crime based on fraud? I used to look up to you and AMG, but the documents in my possession confirm that AMG is nothing a criminal, money-laundering machine. After 18 years of abusing public power for your personal benefit, you must look yourself in the mirror and own up to your own deeds. Fortunately, when Mr. Nyambe starts singing, …
[4:18 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: I thought you would know why I feel sorry for you, but obviously there may not be that capacity.
[4:20 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Your responsibility and duty to TAP would require that you do what you do professionally not to go and discuss your issues through the media.
[4:37 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Are you a public office bearer? I thought you were an Administrator appointed by the minister and not a court unless you self-appointed.

If you’re an Administrator created by law, then I find it disturbing that you would not want to be subject to public scrutiny.

Once appointed by the minister, to assume the control of a juristic entity, you become an administrative authority, meaning that your authority is exclusively based on the operation of law to exercise or perform any administrative power or duty.

I have been seized with the reality of your decision to apply a Zimbabwean statute in Zambia on the basis that to the best of your knowledge, SMM has a shareholding relationship with TAP.

In as much as you may claim that you’re bound by the Kajimanga j…
[4:41 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Interesting, your understanding of public scrutiny.
[5:00 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: The man I look up to is Thomas Jefferson, who said;

“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first.”

“When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property, and justly liable to the inspection and vigilance of public opinion.”
[5:06 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Inga wakaverenga!
[5:07 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: So Mr. Gwaradzimba, I hold you accountable as a trustee of public power, and as such you’re public property and as such, you cannot escape my scrutiny
[5:07 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Inga unesimba rakakura chaizvo.
[2/22, 6:20 PM] Tinashe Mpasiri: [5:16 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: As a citizen, I owe my duty to the constitution
[5:27 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: I believe it’s every citizen’s duty. Only I don’t believe that duty extends to allowing citizens to say whatever they want about other citizens, without them having all the facts regarding the matter at hand.
[5:36 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: That’s exactly what I have been waiting for Mr. Gwaradzimba. You know more than I do.

I also agree with you that crime has no age and has no legs to move, so whatever you did in 2006, remains done and the facts are not capable of changing their reality.

I spoke to Mr. Nyambe who lied to me and said, AMG Chartered Accountants Zimbabwe was involved in some fee sharing arrangement. Why should you tell him to lie when the facts exist and you and I know them?

Is this the kind of Zimbabwe you want and fought for?
[5:38 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I am ashamed to call myself Zimbabwean when people like yourself that I looked up to, believe that the end justifies the means and accountability is only for certain people.
[5:40 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: As a public office bearer, tell me who authorized you to export the Reconstruction Act to Zambia and cause an invoice to be addressed to TAP you knew had no ownership relationship with the SMM that you were given as a weapon to decimate Mawere.

Where you appointed using public power to destroy Mawere using false information? I wonder.
[5:40 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Mr. Mpasiri, you can’t agree with me on something I have not said. If you want to say: “crime has no age and has no legs to move”, say so without saying that you agree with me, as if I ever said that.
[5:41 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Do you think crime can vanish, with time?
[5:42 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: I want to believe that some of the issues you’re bringing up will need to be answered in an appropriate setup.
[5:43 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Am not sure if you expect an answer?
[5:44 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I do expect an answer, sir. You’re my elder and wiser than me.
[5:44 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: And you’re now there to deal with the matter, except that your approach may not be appropriate.
[5:45 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Am never Sir.
[5:45 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Where you quoted correctly here?
[5:46 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Inga dzakakuwabdira nyaya dzacho.
[5:48 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: 👆Is that what you want to say?
[5:50 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Munengewo munoshereketa maningi. I was going to nominate you for honorary under JUROL.

And I recall president Mnangagwa stating, the mines were re-opened after Government won 22 out of 23 litigation cases. Only one case is still.

You have been very busy I must say.
[5:52 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I am only trying to verify. I get misquoted every day.
[5:52 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: How do you nominate someone you don’t know, for anything?
[5:54 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: But you have not verified most of what you tell the world. You only restate what your boss/es will have told you.
[5:58 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I have been reading the havoc you caused in TAP.

I am a CA but never in my life have I have ever heard an Administrator being appointed in relation to the affairs of TAP, only to appoint directors to assume the control of the same company he claims to be in control of.

Does this not deserve to be in the Guinness book of world records.

What liquidation prohibits, you permit.

I am sure if I were the president of Zambia, I would be looking for you to give you the award myself.

You’re a remarkable man Mr. Gwaradzimba. I am inspired by your creative genius to take money out of TAP and claim to be a saint
[5:59 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I do not have a boss, I AM the boss. If you don’t know me by now, you will soon do.
[5:59 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: So all this time you have been trying to tell me you are a CA? Wow!!
[6:01 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Are you by any chance a CA Mr. Gwaradzimba because your works seem to say you do not bong to the profession.
[6:01 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: This appears to make you an extraordinary CA, I guess.
[6:02 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: No terms will make a person what they are not.
[6:02 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Mr. Gwaradzimba sir, when you say something is a minor issue to the public and this involves property, what message are you trying to portray?
[6:03 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Obviously you don’t read with understanding Mr. CA, I have told you am not, or I don’t want to be referred to as sir.
[6:03 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Do you own any property yourself?
[6:04 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Mr. Gwaradzimba please be honest with me, why would insult a victim and say his injury is minor just because you are handling complex matters.

Do you have any advisors dealing with your PR?
[6:05 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: And I wonder as well, as to where you acquired your CA status.
[6:05 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Ask the last of your questions to yourself.
[6:06 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Because this kind of message apart from insulting gives the message that you’re untouchable in a democratic country.

I can see the parallels between TAP and Mawere’s house because, in both, you chowed the money with immunity coupled with arrogance.
[6:06 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Who would allow this kind of behavior or you report to yourself?
[6:07 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I am battling to understand your state of mind, hence I am asking you.
[6:07 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Unfortunately you’re making allegations against another person, which I certainly know, a CA would not do.
[6:07 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: Yes I do
[6:08 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: These are facts Mr. Gwaradzimba
[6:08 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: You actually need to ask that question to yourself.
[6:08 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I have got the facts and if I didn’t have the facts, I would not bother.
[6:08 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: Do you know where it is/they are?
[6:09 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: It is so unfortunate that you underestimate, but one day, you will surely remember me.
[6:12 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: You believe you have the facts. If you had the facts, you would not need to say what you’re saying to me ever since the day you said to me: “My name is Mr. Tinashe Mpasiri”. The matter would have long been properly dealt with.
[6:12 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: I will never forget you for more reasons than one. I never underestimate anything.
[6:13 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: On TAP, are you confident that justice was done when you and your partner in crime, Manikai, working in cahoots with Mundashi and Nyambe including PWC, intentionally and knowingly hijacked a Zambia company with no facts to support this kind of primitive accumulation.
[6:14 pm, 22/02/2022] Gwaradzimba: I also see that you have very little to do outside of this subject matter. Hear from you on another day.
[6:16 pm, 22/02/2022] BOAF MPASIRI: I am following all the forensics and your Mr. Nyambe has already thrown you under the bus. In case you didn’t know.

He says that you used AMG Global Zambia as a vehicle for laundering money.

By the way, who did you pay school fees for in Australia with the TAP money?
[2/22, 10:51 PM] Prof Mupasiri: This is a great exposition there.

Thieves don’t keep records. AMG is in hot soup.

Jurol is circling around these criminals. The problem shall be solved.

The case of white collar criminals clothed in public power.

Can someone tell Me. AMG that a chameleon can change its color, but facts change not!

Continue Reading