Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 5 of 5
The fact that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation continue to mislead investing public and regulatory authorities about the legality of thier illegal action shows fraudulent intent on the part of Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation.



At law generally Innocent misrepresentation (Derry v. Peek)occurs when the representor had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been advised and warned that their take over over Century/cfx Bank was illegal and irregular and is being challenged in high court under high court case HC-6244-04.Below is a related and relevated case which Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation must read ,study and learn from.



"The case of Invertec Limited v. De Mol Holdings BV (1) and Henricus Albertus De Mol (2) provides useful guidance on the circumstances in which a purchaser can make a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation under a share sale and purchase agreement. Invertec (the claimant) and De Mol Holdings BV (DMH) entered into an agreement (SPA) for the sale and purchase of the entire issued share capital of Volante Public Transportation Interior Systems (Volante). Mr De Mol was a director of DMH and its sole shareholder.



Although the transaction only completed on 6 October 2005, Invertec had, by the end of October 2005, injected a further £270,000 into the company to keep it afloat and by the end of December 2005, this figure had increased to £532,000. Volante was eventually placed in to administration in December 2006. Invertec commenced proceedings claiming that it had been induced to enter into the transaction by a number of fraudulent misrepresentations made by DMH and Mr De Mol which subsequently became warranties in the SPA.



The alleged fraudulent misrepresentations were as follows:Volante's management accounts for July and August 2005. Invertec alleged that, contrary to DMH's warranty, the monthly management accounts disclosed to them were not prepared in good faith nor on bases consistent with the management accounts for the year ended 30 June 2005.



The High Court upheld this claim on the basis that Mr De Mol and his financial advisor, Mr De Wit, had clearly altered the bases of the July and August accounts by re-classifying 'factored' sales as 'in-house' sales - the effect of which was that Volante's results were more consistent with the sales projections in the budget provided to Invertec.



No disclosure as to the reclassification of sales in the management accounts was made to Invertec.Volante's solvency. In the SPA, DMH warranted that Volante was not unable to pay its debts within the meaning of section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986. Invertec claimed that in fact, Volante was unable to pay its debts as at 6 October 2005, that DMH knew this before entering into the SPA and that such warranty was false and dishonestly made.



DMH contended that the true construction of the warranty was that it was "merely a warranty that it has not been proved to the satisfaction of a court that Volante is unable to pay its debts as they fall due". The judge disagreed and in upholding Invertec's claim, stated that such a construction "would substantially deprive the warranty of effect and would make no commercial sense".Volante's corporation tax liability with regard to the financial year ended June 2004.



DMH had represented that this sum was lower than it actually was and had failed to make any disclosure against the relevant warranty in the SPA. The judge upheld the claim on the basis that the representations made by DMH that Volante was up-to-date with its corporation tax payments were false and dishonestly made.A contract with one of Volante's customers, Alstom, was loss making and contrary to DMH's warranty that it was not party to any loss-making contracts.



This claim was rejected by the judge on the basis that DMH had disclosed that this contract had been historically unprofitable and would continue to be so unless its terms were re-negotiated.In determining damages, the judge rejected DMH's argument that claims framed by reference to warranties in an SPA should be treated as a breach of contract only and not as misrepresentation. Importantly, the aggregate liability cap of DMH in respect of claims under the SPA (which was limited to the amount of consideration received by them) was held not to apply as there had been deliberate concealment by both DMH and Mr De Mol.



As such, Invertec were entitled to be put back into the position it would have been had the false representations not been made - Mr De Mol was ordered to pay £1,512,113 in damages which represented the initial consideration under the SPA and also a further £532,000 and €216,000 in respect of the successful solvency and corporation tax claims. The rationale for Mr De Mol being personally liable for Invertec's loss was that the fraudulent misrepresentations were largely made by him; he was the sole negotiator for DMH and had signed the transaction documents.



Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation Directors should be aware that even if they are not the selling party to an agreement, any false representations or warranties which they make to a potential purchaser and which have been made knowingly, without belief in their truth, or recklessly, may result in them being personally liable to the purchaser for fraudulent misrepresentation.As was the case above, a successful claim for fraudulent misrepresentation will often serve to extinguish the operation of any limitation of liability clauses negotiated in an agreement.



As such, the importance of the disclosure process in a sale and purchase transaction cannot be overstated; honest, accurate and detailed disclosures will either prevent a fraudulent misrepresentation or warranty claim being made or, as was the case with the Alstom contract above, provide the basis of a successful defence to a warranty claim.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation must be advised of their continued misrepresentation to shareholders,regulators and investing public constitutes a serious offence."

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 4 of 5

by Gilbert Muponda on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 10:21pm

At law generally Innocent misrepresentation (Derry v. Peek)occurs when the representor had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been advised and warned that their take over over Century/cfx Bank was illegal and irregular and is being challenged in high court under high court case HC-6244-04.



The fact that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation continue to mislead investing public and regulatory authorities about the legality of thier illgal action shows fraudulent intent on the part of Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation.



In this article I have borrowed liberally from Wikipedia on seeking to unpack the illegal actions by Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation .



Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation actions on Century/CFX Bank leaves a lot to be desired especially given how they have tried to conceal Interfin's illegal and corrupt take over of Century/CFX Bank.In any business it is normal to make a mistake in terms of judgement or at times to act without full information.Inititally Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation could be excused on the assumption that they were not aware of what was happening on the illegal take over of Century/CFX Bank.



Instance of false statement where (1) the party making the statement is aware that it is false or disregards the possibility of it being false, (2) the party making the statement does so to induce another party to enter into a contract, and (3) the other party enters the contract as a result of the statement and consequently suffers a loss.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are making false declarations to mislead investing public and regulatory bodies.



Fraudulent misrepresentation occurs when one makes representation with intent to deceive and with the knowledge that it is false. An action for fraudulent misrepresentation allows for a remedy of damages and rescission. One can also sue for fraudulent misrepresentation in a tort action. Fraudulent misrepresentation is capable of being made recklessly



According to Wikipedia Negligent misrepresentation at common law occurs when the defendant carelessly makes a representation while having no reasonable basis to believe it to be true. This type of misrepresentation is relatively new and was introduced to allow damages in situations where neither a collateral contract nor fraud is found. It was first seen in the case of Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] A.C. 465 where the court found that a statement made negligently that was relied upon can be actionable in tort.



"Distortion of FactA representor may make a statement which prima facie is technically true; however this may tell only half the story. If a statement of fact is made but the representor fails to include information which would significantly alter the interpretation of this fact, then a misrepresentation may have occurred. In Krakowski v Eurolynx Properties Ltd (1995) 183 CLR 563, " This is exactly what Interfin and its Directors have been doing regarding CFX Bank.



"Learned FalsityThe negotiating stage of a contract can be a time consuming process. Because of this, new information may arise and circumstances may change. This can result in two situations which can result in a misrepresentation if silence is kept. The first is if the representor subsequently discovers that the statement was false, the second being if the statement becomes false at a later time. If a statement is made and it is subsequently made known to the representor that it is false, it would obviously be inequitable to allow the representor to remain silent with the new information.



In Lockhart v. Osman [1981] VR 57, an agent had advertised some cattle as being "well suited for breeding purposes". Later on it was discovered that the stock had been exposed to a contagious disease which affected the reproductive system. It was held that the agent had a duty to take remedial action and correct the representation. The failure by the agent to take such measures resulted in the contract being set aside.



Should a statement be made which is true at the time, but subsequently becomes untrue due to a change in circumstances, the representor is obligated to amend the original statement" At the start one could have assumed that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation were not aware of their illegal actions but now that High Court case HC-6244-04 has been brought to their attention they are now liable for any other statement sthey may make on CFX Bank which seek to justify their illegal and corrupt actions.



This is the relationship that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have to the shareholders and general investing public "Fiduciary Relationships - A fiduciary relationship is one of trust and confidence; it involves one party acting for the benefit of another. For this reason, when entering into a contract, it is important for a fiduciary to disclose all facts which could be considered material even if not expressly asked about.[5] In Lowther v Lord Lowther (1806) 13 Ves Jr 95, the plaintiff handed over a picture to an agent for sale. The agent knew of the pictures true worth yet bought it for a considerably lower price.



The plaintiff subsequently discovered the pictures true worth and sued to rescind the contract. It was held that the defendant was in a fiduciary relationship with the plaintiff and accordingly assumed an obligation to disclose all material facts. Accordingly the contract could be rescinded." Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are expected to act in proffessi9onal manner to safeguard investors and shareholders yet they continue to mislead and misrepresent thereby breaaking their fiduciary dutiesAccording to Wikipedia "Contracts 'Uberrimae Fidei'A contract uberrimae fidei is a contract of 'utmost good faith'.



Similarly to fiduciary relationships, the parties are required to make known all material facts influencing the contract. Contracts uberrimae fidei usually arise when one party has knowledge which the other does not have access to. Contracts which are commonly considered to be of such a nature include contracts of insurance and family agreements. When applying for insurance, the person or entity must disclose all material facts so that the insurer can properly asses the risk involved with the offering of insurance.



Since the insurer cannot have access to all information relating to the insured and their situation which could affect the risk involved, it is necessary for this disclosure so that both parties are entering into the contract on equal grounds. Lord Blackburn addressed the issue in Brownlie v Campbell (1880) 5 App Cas 925 when he noted "...the concealment of a material circumstance known to you...avoids the policy"



This is true in as far as Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are misleading shareholders and potential shareholders to buy Interfin Banking Corporation shares fully aware of the implications of High court case HC-6244-04 which wiill leave Interfin Bank a mere shell.



Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are breaking various laws and regulations in their defiance of common sense.As Directors of a Public Compnay and Financial Institution they have Fiduciary responsibilities under the Companies Act,The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Act ,The Banking Act and The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act.They are breaking all those acts whilst defending a looted asset which was fraudulently seized from ENG Capital.

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 3 of 5

by Gilbert Muponda on Sunday, November 21, 2010 at 10:11am

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation actions on Century/CFX Bank leaves a lot to be desired especially given how they have tried to conceal Interfin's illegal and corrupt take over of Century/CFX Bank.



In any business it is normal to make a mistake in terms of judgement or at times to act without full information.Inititally Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation could be excused on the assumption that they were not aware of what was happening on the illegal take over of Century/CFX Bank.



However when it becomes clear that the Bank has been invloved in an illegal and irregular transaction there is no excuse for Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation to proceed and manupoulativley convince their lawyers such as Mr Stanford Moyo to issue a legal opinion that would attempt to conceal and hide the initial fraudulent conversion of Century Bank into CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation.



Such actions are illegal and fraudulent.Once Directors become aware of an illegal and irregular transaction they have an obligation to try and resolve the matter as amicable as possible.There is normally no need for bravado as is being displayed by Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation .Such arrogance and bravado only serves to complicate the situation as it becomes necessary to investigate whether the initial transaction was a mistake or Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation in fact connived to defraud ENG Capital of its 309 million shares in Century/CFX Bank valued at US$ 15.4 million



Directors of a Bank are supposed to be people of unquestionable honesty and integrity.They have serious responsibity to the investing public and to regulatory authorities who entrust them to do the right,legal things at all times in addition to being honest about any activities the Bank may undertake.The defiance of logic by Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation in light of overwhelming evidence that Interfin are in possession of a stolen asset only brings into question the intergrity of Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation According to recent press reports Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.



This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are breaking various laws and regulations in their defiance of common sense.As Directors of a Public Compnay and Financial Institution they have Fiduciary responsibilities under the Companies Act,The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Act ,The Banking Act and The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act.They are breaking all those acts whilst defending a looted asset which was fraudulently seized from ENG Capital.
Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 2 of 5

by Gilbert Muponda on Saturday, November 20, 2010 at 6:57pm

According to recent press reports Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.



The current Interfin Banking Coroporation (IBC) is a fraudulent result from the illegal and irreugular conversion of Century Bank into CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation.The fast and swift Bank name changes over a very short period clearly show an attempt to conceal the illegal and fraudulent seizurwe of Century Bank which was rebranded CFX Bank.



CFX bank was further rebranded into Interfin Banking Corporation as a way to hide the illegal conversion of 309 million Century Bank shares belonging to ENG Capital which were illegaly and corruptly converted to CFX Bank.



Since the 309 million belongong to ENG Capital were illegally and corruptly converted into CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation ENG has a legitimate and indisputable claim of $ 15.4 million against Interfin Holdings Zimbabwe being the 309 million shares multiplied by $ 0.05 per share.this claim is premised on the high court case HC-6244-04 which is currently before the High Court of Zimbabwe.



Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been busy grand standing and misleading regulatory authorities using various legal and illegal tactics.These include manupulating the press and legal advisors into making suspcious legal opinion which are based on incompletew and at times totally false information.



Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation must be made awre its a crime to mislead investors into buying shares whilst withholding material information.This is a serious offence which undermines investor confidence in Zimnbabwe's financial and banking system.Its totally unheard of for a Managing Director and his Chairman to be stepping over each other to make false and misleading information whilst hiding the truth as Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been doing over the last few months.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are breaking various laws and regulations in their defiance of common sense.



As Directors of a Public Company and Financial Institution they have Fiduciary responsibilities under the Companies Act,The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Act ,The Banking Act and The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act.They are breaking all those acts whilst defending a looted asset which was fraudulently seized from ENG Capital.

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 1 of 5

by Gilbert Muponda on Thursday, November 18, 2010 at 7:55pm

The Herald Newspaper this week reported that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.



Farai Rwodzi,Raymond Njanike and Interfin banking Corporation owe are fully aware that their taske over of Century.CFX Bank was fraudulent therefore its null and void.In addition its a mind boggling puzzle how individuals who claim to be Bankers can go ahead and "take over" a Bank whose ownership is already being challenged in Court under HIGH court case HC-6244-02 .



Such actions are clearly fraudulent as Interfin are now trying to rebrand the Bank and strip assets whilct the case is still pending before the courts.Their aim is to mix up assets until they cant be identified or traced theby allowing them to get away with the fraud and conceal their illegal actions.Farai Rwodzi and Interfin owe $ 15.4 million being the value of the fraudelently acquired 309 million shares at the share value of $ 0.05 per share.



This claim is indisputable since Interfin were fully aware of the legal proceedings regarding these shares before their purported "acquistion" of Century/CFX Bank.Instead of continueing to mislead investing public,depositors and regulatory approvals about their fraudulent activities Interfin should be focused on raisning the $ 15.4 million which they owe me and my Company ENG Capital for the 309 million shares at $ 0.05 per share.



Interfin Bank, Raymond Njanike and Farai Rwodzi have been manupulating their lawyers Mr Stanford Moyo and Mr Addington Chinake by giving them false and incomplete information about their illegal and irregular acquistion of CFX/Century Bank.In turn these reputable lawyers were duped into issuing legal opinion which they wouldnt have issued had they known the full facts such as the High Court case HC-6244-04.



In addition Farai Rwodzi,Raymond Njanike and Interfin Bank have proceeded to mislead regulatory Authorities into approving a fraudulent transaction which is being challenged in court.Such actions of deliberately misleading a regulatory body are illegal and fraudulent.These actions endangers the survival of Interfin and potentially puts investor funds into jeorpady once the regulators discover that their approavals were obtained based on false and incomplete disclosure of information.

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 1 of 5

The Herald Newspaper this week reported that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.

Farai Rwodzi,Raymond Njanike and Interfin banking Corporation owe are fully aware that their taske over of Century.CFX Bank was fraudulent therefore its null and void.In addition its a mind boggling puzzle how individuals who claim to be Bankers can go ahead and "take over" a Bank whose ownership is already being challenged in Court under HIGH court case HC-6244-02 .

Such actions are clearly fraudulent as Interfin are now trying to rebrand the Bank and strip assets whilct the case is still pending before the courts.Their aim is to mix up assets until they cant be identified or traced theby allowing them to get away with the fraud and conceal their illegal actions.Farai Rwodzi and Interfin owe $ 15.4 million being the value of the fraudelently acquired 309 million shares at the share value of $ 0.05 per share.

This claim is indisputable since Interfin were fully aware of the legal proceedings regarding these shares before their purported "acquistion" of Century/CFX Bank.Instead of continueing to mislead investing public,depositors and regulatory approvals about their fraudulent activities Interfin should be focused on raisning the $ 15.4 million which they owe me and my Company ENG Capital for the 309 million shares at $ 0.05 per share.

Interfin Bank, Raymond Njanike and Farai Rwodzi have been manupulating their lawyers Mr Stanford Moyo and Mr Addington Chinake by giving them false and incomplete information about their illegal and irregular acquistion of CFX/Century Bank.In turn these reputable lawyers were duped into issuing legal opinion which they wouldnt have issued had they known the full facts such as the High Court case HC-6244-04.

In addition Farai Rwodzi,Raymond Njanike and Interfin Bank have proceeded to mislead regulatory Authorities into approving a fraudulent transaction which is being challenged in court.Such actions of deliberately misleading a regulatory body are illegal and fraudulent.These actions endangers the survival of Interfin and potentially puts investor funds into jeorpady once the regulators discover that their approavals were obtained based on false and incomplete disclosure of information.


Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL ( www.gmricapital) .

He can be reached at; www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca .
Skype ID: eng.capital
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/engcapital
http://www.youtube.com/user/ENGCapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented – 2 of 5

According to recent press reports Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.

The current Interfin Banking Coroporation (IBC) is a fraudulent result from the illegal and irreugular conversion of Century Bank into CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation.The fast and swift Bank name changes over a very short period clearly show an attempt to conceal the illegal and fraudulent seizurwe of Century Bank which was rebranded CFX Bank.

CFX bank was further rebranded into Interfin Banking Corporation as a way to hide the illegal conversion of 309 million Century Bank shares belonging to ENG Capital which were illegaly and corruptly converted to CFX Bank.

Since the 309 million belongong to ENG Capital were illegally and corruptly converted into CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation ENG has a legitimate and indisputable claim of $ 15.4 million against Interfin Holdings Zimbabwe being the 309 million shares multiplied by $ 0.05 per share.this claim is premised on the high court case HC-6244-04 which is currently before the High Court of Zimbabwe.

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been busy grand standing and misleading regulatory authorities using various legal and illegal tactics.These include manupulating the press and legal advisors into making suspcious legal opinion which are based on incompletew and at times totally false information.

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation must be made awre its a crime to mislead investors into buying shares whilst withholding material information.This is a serious offence which undermines investor confidence in Zimnbabwe's financial and banking system.Its totally unheard of for a Managing Director and his Chairman to be stepping over each other to make false and misleading information whilst hiding the truth as Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been doing over the last few months.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are breaking various laws and regulations in their defiance of common sense.

As Directors of a Public CompaNy and Financial Institution they have Fiduciary responsibilities under the Companies Act,The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Act ,The Banking Act and The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act.They are breaking all those acts whilst defending a looted asset which was fraudulently seized from ENG Capital.


Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL ( www.gmricapital) .He can be reached at; www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca .
Skype ID: eng.capital
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/engcapital
http://www.youtube.com/user/ENGCapital

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented – 3 of 5

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation actions on Century/CFX Bank leaves a lot to be desired especially given how they have tried to conceal Interfin's illegal and corrupt take over of Century/CFX Bank.

In any business it is normal to make a mistake in terms of judgement or at times to act without full information.Inititally Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation could be excused on the assumption that they were not aware of what was happening on the illegal take over of Century/CFX Bank.

However when it becomes clear that the Bank has been invloved in an illegal and irregular transaction there is no excuse for Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation to proceed and manupoulativley convince their lawyers such as Mr Stanford Moyo to issue a legal opinion that would attempt to conceal and hide the initial fraudulent conversion of Century Bank into CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation.

Such actions are illegal and fraudulent.Once Directors become aware of an illegal and irregular transaction they have an obligation to try and resolve the matter as amicable as possible.There is normally no need for bravado as is being displayed by Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation .Such arrogance and bravado only serves to complicate the situation as it becomes necessary to investigate whether the initial transaction was a mistake or Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation in fact connived to defraud ENG Capital of its 309 million shares in Century/CFX Bank valued at US$ 15.4 million

Directors of a Bank are supposed to be people of unquestionable honesty and integrity.They have serious responsibity to the investing public and to regulatory authorities who entrust them to do the right,legal things at all times in addition to being honest about any activities the Bank may undertake.The defiance of logic by Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation in light of overwhelming evidence that Interfin are in possession of a stolen asset only brings into question the intergrity of Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation According to recent press reports Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.

This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are breaking various laws and regulations in their defiance of common sense.As Directors of a Public Compnay and Financial Institution they have Fiduciary responsibilities under the Companies Act,The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Act ,The Banking Act and The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act.They are breaking all those acts whilst defending a looted asset which was fraudulently seized from ENG Capital.


Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL ( www.gmricapital) .

He can be reached at; www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca .
Skype ID: eng.capital
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/engcapital
http://www.youtube.com/user/ENGCapital

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented – 4 of 5

by Gilbert Muponda on Tuesday, November 23, 2010 at 10:21pm
At law generally Innocent misrepresentation (Derry v. Peek)occurs when the representor had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been advised and warned that their take over over Century/cfx Bank was illegal and irregular and is being challenged in high court under high court case HC-6244-04.

The fact that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation continue to mislead investing public and regulatory authorities about the legality of thier illgal action shows fraudulent intent on the part of Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation.

In this article I have borrowed liberally from Wikipedia on seeking to unpack the illegal actions by Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation .

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation actions on Century/CFX Bank leaves a lot to be desired especially given how they have tried to conceal Interfin's illegal and corrupt take over of Century/CFX Bank.In any business it is normal to make a mistake in terms of judgement or at times to act without full information.Inititally Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation could be excused on the assumption that they were not aware of what was happening on the illegal take over of Century/CFX Bank.

Instance of false statement where (1) the party making the statement is aware that it is false or disregards the possibility of it being false, (2) the party making the statement does so to induce another party to enter into a contract, and (3) the other party enters the contract as a result of the statement and consequently suffers a loss.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are making false declarations to mislead investing public and regulatory bodies.

Fraudulent misrepresentation occurs when one makes representation with intent to deceive and with the knowledge that it is false. An action for fraudulent misrepresentation allows for a remedy of damages and rescission. One can also sue for fraudulent misrepresentation in a tort action. Fraudulent misrepresentation is capable of being made recklessly

According to Wikipedia Negligent misrepresentation at common law occurs when the defendant carelessly makes a representation while having no reasonable basis to believe it to be true. This type of misrepresentation is relatively new and was introduced to allow damages in situations where neither a collateral contract nor fraud is found. It was first seen in the case of Hedley Byrne v Heller [1964] A.C. 465 where the court found that a statement made negligently that was relied upon can be actionable in tort.

"Distortion of FactA representor may make a statement which prima facie is technically true; however this may tell only half the story. If a statement of fact is made but the representor fails to include information which would significantly alter the interpretation of this fact, then a misrepresentation may have occurred. In Krakowski v Eurolynx Properties Ltd (1995) 183 CLR 563, " This is exactly what Interfin and its Directors have been doing regarding CFX Bank.

"Learned FalsityThe negotiating stage of a contract can be a time consuming process. Because of this, new information may arise and circumstances may change. This can result in two situations which can result in a misrepresentation if silence is kept. The first is if the representor subsequently discovers that the statement was false, the second being if the statement becomes false at a later time. If a statement is made and it is subsequently made known to the representor that it is false, it would obviously be inequitable to allow the representor to remain silent with the new information.

In Lockhart v. Osman [1981] VR 57, an agent had advertised some cattle as being “well suited for breeding purposes”. Later on it was discovered that the stock had been exposed to a contagious disease which affected the reproductive system. It was held that the agent had a duty to take remedial action and correct the representation. The failure by the agent to take such measures resulted in the contract being set aside.

Should a statement be made which is true at the time, but subsequently becomes untrue due to a change in circumstances, the representor is obligated to amend the original statement" At the start one could have assumed that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation were not aware of their illegal actions but now that High Court case HC-6244-04 has been brought to their attention they are now liable for any other statement sthey may make on CFX Bank which seek to justify their illegal and corrupt actions.

This is the relationship that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have to the shareholders and general investing public "Fiduciary Relationships - A fiduciary relationship is one of trust and confidence; it involves one party acting for the benefit of another. For this reason, when entering into a contract, it is important for a fiduciary to disclose all facts which could be considered material even if not expressly asked about.[5] In Lowther v Lord Lowther (1806) 13 Ves Jr 95, the plaintiff handed over a picture to an agent for sale. The agent knew of the pictures true worth yet bought it for a considerably lower price.

The plaintiff subsequently discovered the pictures true worth and sued to rescind the contract. It was held that the defendant was in a fiduciary relationship with the plaintiff and accordingly assumed an obligation to disclose all material facts. Accordingly the contract could be rescinded." Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are expected to act in proffessi9onal manner to safeguard investors and shareholders yet they continue to mislead and misrepresent thereby breaaking their fiduciary dutiesAccording to Wikipedia "Contracts ‘Uberrimae Fidei’A contract uberrimae fidei is a contract of ‘utmost good faith’.

Similarly to fiduciary relationships, the parties are required to make known all material facts influencing the contract. Contracts uberrimae fidei usually arise when one party has knowledge which the other does not have access to. Contracts which are commonly considered to be of such a nature include contracts of insurance and family agreements. When applying for insurance, the person or entity must disclose all material facts so that the insurer can properly asses the risk involved with the offering of insurance.

Since the insurer cannot have access to all information relating to the insured and their situation which could affect the risk involved, it is necessary for this disclosure so that both parties are entering into the contract on equal grounds. Lord Blackburn addressed the issue in Brownlie v Campbell (1880) 5 App Cas 925 when he noted "...the concealment of a material circumstance known to you...avoids the policy"

This is true in as far as Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are misleading shareholders and potential shareholders to buy Interfin Banking Corporation shares fully aware of the implications of High court case HC-6244-04 which wiill leave Interfin Bank a mere shell.

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation are breaking various laws and regulations in their defiance of common sense.As Directors of a Public Compnay and Financial Institution they have Fiduciary responsibilities under the Companies Act,The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Act ,The Banking Act and The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act.They are breaking all those acts whilst defending a looted asset which was fraudulently seized from ENG Capital.

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL ( www.gmricapital) .
He can be reached at; www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca .
Skype ID: eng.capitalTwitter ;
http://twitter.com/engcapital
http://www.youtube.com/user/ENGCapital

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented – 5 of 5

The fact that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation continue to mislead investing public and regulatory authorities about the legality of thier illegal action shows fraudulent intent on the part of Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation.

At law generally Innocent misrepresentation (Derry v. Peek)occurs when the representor had reasonable grounds for believing that his or her false statement was true.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation have been advised and warned that their take over over Century/cfx Bank was illegal and irregular and is being challenged in high court under high court case HC-6244-04.Below is a related and relevated case which Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation must read ,study and learn from.

"The case of Invertec Limited v. De Mol Holdings BV (1) and Henricus Albertus De Mol (2) provides useful guidance on the circumstances in which a purchaser can make a claim for fraudulent misrepresentation under a share sale and purchase agreement. Invertec (the claimant) and De Mol Holdings BV (DMH) entered into an agreement (SPA) for the sale and purchase of the entire issued share capital of Volante Public Transportation Interior Systems (Volante). Mr De Mol was a director of DMH and its sole shareholder.

Although the transaction only completed on 6 October 2005, Invertec had, by the end of October 2005, injected a further £270,000 into the company to keep it afloat and by the end of December 2005, this figure had increased to £532,000. Volante was eventually placed in to administration in December 2006. Invertec commenced proceedings claiming that it had been induced to enter into the transaction by a number of fraudulent misrepresentations made by DMH and Mr De Mol which subsequently became warranties in the SPA.

The alleged fraudulent misrepresentations were as follows:Volante's management accounts for July and August 2005. Invertec alleged that, contrary to DMH's warranty, the monthly management accounts disclosed to them were not prepared in good faith nor on bases consistent with the management accounts for the year ended 30 June 2005.

The High Court upheld this claim on the basis that Mr De Mol and his financial advisor, Mr De Wit, had clearly altered the bases of the July and August accounts by re-classifying 'factored' sales as 'in-house' sales – the effect of which was that Volante's results were more consistent with the sales projections in the budget provided to Invertec.

No disclosure as to the reclassification of sales in the management accounts was made to Invertec.Volante's solvency. In the SPA, DMH warranted that Volante was not unable to pay its debts within the meaning of section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986. Invertec claimed that in fact, Volante was unable to pay its debts as at 6 October 2005, that DMH knew this before entering into the SPA and that such warranty was false and dishonestly made.

DMH contended that the true construction of the warranty was that it was "merely a warranty that it has not been proved to the satisfaction of a court that Volante is unable to pay its debts as they fall due". The judge disagreed and in upholding Invertec's claim, stated that such a construction "would substantially deprive the warranty of effect and would make no commercial sense".Volante's corporation tax liability with regard to the financial year ended June 2004.

DMH had represented that this sum was lower than it actually was and had failed to make any disclosure against the relevant warranty in the SPA. The judge upheld the claim on the basis that the representations made by DMH that Volante was up-to-date with its corporation tax payments were false and dishonestly made.A contract with one of Volante's customers, Alstom, was loss making and contrary to DMH's warranty that it was not party to any loss-making contracts.

This claim was rejected by the judge on the basis that DMH had disclosed that this contract had been historically unprofitable and would continue to be so unless its terms were re-negotiated.In determining damages, the judge rejected DMH's argument that claims framed by reference to warranties in an SPA should be treated as a breach of contract only and not as misrepresentation. Importantly, the aggregate liability cap of DMH in respect of claims under the SPA (which was limited to the amount of consideration received by them) was held not to apply as there had been deliberate concealment by both DMH and Mr De Mol.

As such, Invertec were entitled to be put back into the position it would have been had the false representations not been made – Mr De Mol was ordered to pay £1,512,113 in damages which represented the initial consideration under the SPA and also a further £532,000 and €216,000 in respect of the successful solvency and corporation tax claims. The rationale for Mr De Mol being personally liable for Invertec's loss was that the fraudulent misrepresentations were largely made by him; he was the sole negotiator for DMH and had signed the transaction documents.Conclusion

Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation Directors should be aware that even if they are not the selling party to an agreement, any false representations or warranties which they make to a potential purchaser and which have been made knowingly, without belief in their truth, or recklessly, may result in them being personally liable to the purchaser for fraudulent misrepresentation.As was the case above, a successful claim for fraudulent misrepresentation will often serve to extinguish the operation of any limitation of liability clauses negotiated in an agreement.

As such, the importance of the disclosure process in a sale and purchase transaction cannot be overstated; honest, accurate and detailed disclosures will either prevent a fraudulent misrepresentation or warranty claim being made or, as was the case with the Alstom contract above, provide the basis of a successful defence to a warranty claim.Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation must be advised of their continued misrepresentation to shareholders,regulators and investing public constitutes a serious offence."

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL ( www.gmricapital) .He can be reached at; www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca .
Skype ID: eng.capital
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/engcapital
http://www.youtube.com/user/ENGCapital

Fraud by Raymond Njanike,Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank against ENG Capital cant go undocumented - 1 of 5

The Herald Newspaper this week reported that Raymond Njanike ( Interfin Bank MD) ,Farai Rwodzi ( Interfin Chairman) and Interfin Banking Corporation had managed to to mislead regulatory Authorities such as the Reserve Bank and Ministry of Finance to approve their fraudulent take over of Century/CFX Bank.This fraudulent transaction is still being challenged in court under high court case HC 6244-04.

Farai Rwodzi,Raymond Njanike and Interfin banking Corporation owe are fully aware that their taske over of Century.CFX Bank was fraudulent therefore its null and void.In addition its a mind boggling puzzle how individuals who claim to be Bankers can go ahead and "take over" a Bank whose ownership is already being challenged in Court under HIGH court case HC-6244-02 .

Such actions are clearly fraudulent as Interfin are now trying to rebrand the Bank and strip assets whilct the case is still pending before the courts.Their aim is to mix up assets until they cant be identified or traced theby allowing them to get away with the fraud and conceal their illegal actions.Farai Rwodzi and Interfin owe $ 15.4 million being the value of the fraudelently acquired 309 million shares at the share value of $ 0.05 per share.

This claim is indisputable since Interfin were fully aware of the legal proceedings regarding these shares before their purported "acquistion" of Century/CFX Bank.Instead of continueing to mislead investing public,depositors and regulatory approvals about their fraudulent activities Interfin should be focused on raisning the $ 15.4 million which they owe me and my Company ENG Capital for the 309 million shares at $ 0.05 per share.

Interfin Bank, Raymond Njanike and Farai Rwodzi have been manupulating their lawyers Mr Stanford Moyo and Mr Addington Chinake by giving them false and incomplete information about their illegal and irregular acquistion of CFX/Century Bank.In turn these reputable lawyers were duped into issuing legal opinion which they wouldnt have issued had they known the full facts such as the High Court case HC-6244-04.

In addition Farai Rwodzi,Raymond Njanike and Interfin Bank have proceeded to mislead regulatory Authorities into approving a fraudulent transaction which is being challenged in court.Such actions of deliberately misleading a regulatory body are illegal and fraudulent.These actions endangers the survival of Interfin and potentially puts investor funds into jeorpady once the regulators discover that their approavals were obtained based on false and incomplete disclosure of information.


Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL ( www.gmricapital) .

He can be reached at; www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca .
Skype ID: eng.capital
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/engcapital
http://www.youtube.com/user/ENGCapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

The US on Zimbabwe, Mugabe, Tsvangirai and Ncube

International wesbite Wikileaks has begun releasing more than 250 000 documents detailing correspondence between the US State Department and Washington’s various embassies around the world.

The 251 287 documents previously unavailable to the public and all of which are classified either confidential or secret focus on US policy and diplomatic relations between the world’s sole superpower and countries in the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere.

And below is a document filed by headquarters by the then US ambassador to Zimbabwe Christopher Dell in 2007. The document gives insights into US thinking and objectives on Zimbabwe as well as Washington’s opinion about the leading political players in the southern African country:



Date 2007-07-13 10:04:00

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 HARARE 000638

SUBJECT: The End is Nigh

Classified By: Ambassador Christopher W. Dell under Section 1.4b/d

Having said my piece repeatedly over the last three years, I won't offer a lengthy prescription for our Zimbabwe policy. My views can be stated very simply as stay the course and prepare for change. Our policy is working and it's helping to drive change here. What is required is simply the grit, determination and focus to see this through. Then, when the changes finally come we must be ready to move quickly to help consolidate the new dispensation.

THE SITUATION

Robert Mugabe has survived for so long because he is more clever and more ruthless than any other politician in Zimbabwe. To give the devil his due, he is a brilliant tactician and has long thrived on his ability to abruptly change the rules of the game, radicalise the political dynamic and force everyone else to react to his agenda.

However, he is fundamentally hampered by several factors: his ego and belief in his own infallibility; his obsessive focus on the past as a justification for everything in the present and future; his deep ignorance on economic issues (coupled with the belief that his 18 doctorates give him the authority to suspend the laws of economics, including supply and demand); and his essentially short-term, tactical style.

While his tactical skills have kept him in power for 27 years, over the last seven this has only been achieved by a series of populist, but destructive and ultimately self-defeating moves. In reaction to losing the 2000 referendum on the constitution, a vengeful Mugabe unleashed his Green Bombers to commit land reform and in the process he destroyed Zimbabwe’s agricultural sector, once the bedrock of the economy.

While thousands of white farmers saw their properties seized, hundreds of thousands of black Zimbabweans lost their livelihoods and were reduced to utter poverty. In 2005, having been forced to steal victory by manipulating the results of an election he lost, Mugabe lashed out again, punishing the urban populace by launching Operation Murambatsvina. The result was wholesale destruction of the informal sector, on which as much as 70-80 percent of urban dwellers had depended, and the uprooting of 700,000 Zimbabweans. The current inflationary cycle really began with Murambatsvina, as rents and prices grew in response to a decrease in supply.

And now, faced with the hyperinflationary consequences of his ruinous fiscal policies and growing reliance on the printing press to keep his government running, Mugabe has launched Operation Slash Prices. This has once again given him a very temporary boost in popularity especially among the police, who have led the looting of retail outlets and now seem well positioned to take a leading role in the black market economy) at the cost of terrible damage to the country and people.

Many small grocery and shop owners, traders, etc., will be wiped out; the shelves are increasingly bare; hunger, fear, and tension are growing; fuel has disappeared. When the shelves are still empty this time next week, the popular appeal of the price roll back will evaporate and the government simply doesn’t have the resources to replace the entire private commercial sector and keep Zimbabweans fed. It may attempt to do so by printing more money, adding even more inflationary pressure on a system already reeling from the GOZ’s quasi-fiscal lunacy combined with the price impact of pervasive shortages.

The increasingly worthless Zim dollar is likely to collapse as a unit of trade in the near future, depriving the Government of Zimbabwe of its last economic tool other than sheer thuggery and theft of others’ assets.

With all this in view, I’m convinced the end is not far off for the Mugabe regime. Of course, my predecessors and many other observers have all said the same thing, and yet Mugabe is still with us. I think this time could prove different, however, because for the first time the president is under intensifying pressure simultaneously on the economic, political and international fronts.

In the past, he could always play one of these off against the other, using economic moves to counter political pressure or playing the old colonial/race/imperialist themes to buy himself breathing room regionally and internationally. But he is running out of options and in the swirling gases of the new Zimbabwean constellation that is starting to form, the economic, political and international pressures are concentrating on Mugabe himself.

Our Zanu PF contacts are virtually unanimous in saying reform is desperately needed, but won't happen while the Old Man is there, and therefore he must go (finding the courage to make that happen is another matter, however, but even that may be coming closer).

This is not some sudden awakening on the road to Damascus, but a reflection of the pain even party insiders increasingly feel over the economic meltdown. We also get regular, albeit anecdotal, reports of angry and increasingly open mutterings against Mugabe even in ZANU-PF's traditional rural bastions.

Beginning in March, the other SADC leaders finally recognised (in the wake of the terrible beatings of March 11 and the international outcry that followed another self-inflicted wound for Mugabe) that Zimbabwe is a problem they need to address.

Thabo Mbeki appears committed to a successful mediation and is reportedly increasingly irritated with Mugabe’s efforts to manipulate him or blow him off altogether. If Mugabe judges that he still commands all he surveys by virtue of being the elder statesman on the scene, he may be committing yet another serious blunder.

Finally, one does well to recall that the only serious civil disturbances here in a decade came in 1998 over bread shortages, showing that even the famously passive Shona people have their limits. The terror and oppression of the intervening years have cowed people, but it’s anyone’s guess whether their fear or their anger will win out in the end.

WHAT WILL THE END LOOK LIKE?

This is the big, unanswerable question. One thing at least is certain, Mugabe will not wake up one morning a changed man, resolved to set right all he has wrought. He will not go quietly nor without a fight. He will cling to power at all costs and the costs be damned, he deserves to rule by virtue of the liberation struggle and land reform and the people of Zimbabwe have let him down by failing to appreciate this, thus he needn’t worry about their well-being.

The only scenario in which he might agree to go with a modicum of good grace is one in which he concludes that the only way to end his days a free man is by leaving State House. I judge that he is still a long way from this conclusion and will fight on for now.

The optimal outcome, of course, and the only one that doesn’t bring with it a huge risk of violence and conflict, is a genuinely free and fair election, under international supervision. The Mbeki mediation offers the best, albeit very slim, hope of getting there.

However, as Pretoria grows more and more worried about the chaos to its north and President Mbeki’s patience with Mugabe’s antics wears thin, the prospects for serious South African engagement may be growing. Thus, this effort deserves all the support and backing we can muster.

Less attractive is the idea of a South African-brokered transitional arrangement or government of national unity. Mbeki has always favored stability and in his mind this means a Zanu PF-led GNU, with perhaps a few MDC additions. This solution is more likely to prolong than resolve the crisis and we must guard against letting Pretoria dictate an outcome which perpetuates the status quo at the expense of real change and reform.

The other scenarios are all less attractive: a popular uprising would inevitably entail a bloodbath, even if it were ultimately successful; Mugabe’s sudden, unexpected death would set off a stampede for power among Zanu PF heavy weights; a palace coup, whether initiated within Zanu PF or from the military -- in which Mugabe is removed, killed, exiled or otherwise disposed of, could well devolve into open conflict between the contending successors.

Similarly, some form of "constitutional coup" i.e., a change at the top engineered within the framework of Zanu PF's "legitimate" structures could well prove to be merely the opening bell in a prolonged power struggle. None of the players is likely to go quietly into the night without giving everything they have, including calling on their supporters in the security services. Moreover, experience elsewhere would suggest that whoever comes out on top initially will struggle, and more than likely fail, to halt the economic collapse. Thus, there is a good prospect of not one but a series of rapid-fire transitions, until some new, stable dispensation is reached.

The final, and probably worst, possibility is that Mugabe concludes he can settle for ruling over a rump Zimbabwe, maintaining control over Harare and the MaShona heartland, the critical forces of the National Reserve Force and CIO and a few key assets gold, diamonds, platinum and Air Zimbabwe to fund the good times. Under this scenario, the rest of the country, in one of the comrade’s favorite phrases, could “go hang”, leaving it to the international community to stave off the worst humanitarian consequences.

WHAT OF THE OPPOSITION?

Zimbabwe’s opposition is far from ideal and I leave convinced that had we had different partners, we could have achieved more already. But you have to play the hand you’re dealt. With that in mind, the current leadership has little executive experience and will require massive hand holding and assistance should they ever come to power.

Morgan Tsvangarai is a brave, committed man and, by and large, a democrat. He is also the only player on the scene right now with real star quality and the ability to rally the masses. But Tsvangirai is also a flawed figure, not readily open to advice, indecisive and with questionable judgment in selecting those around him. He is the indispensable element for opposition success, but possibly an albatross around their necks once in power. In short, he is a kind of Lech Walesa character: Zimbabwe needs him, but should not rely on his executive abilities to lead the country's recovery.

Arthur Mutambara is young and ambitious, attracted to radical, anti-western rhetoric and smart as a whip. But, in many respects he’s a light-weight who has spent too much time reading U.S. campaign messaging manuals and too little thinking about the real issues.

Welshman Ncube has proven to be a deeply divisive and destructive player in the opposition ranks and the sooner he is pushed off the stage, the better. But he is useful to many, including the regime and South Africa, so is probably a cross to be borne for some time yet. The prospects for healing the rift within the MDC seem dim, which is a totally unnecessary self-inflicted wound on their part this time.

With few exceptions -- Tendai Biti, Nelson Chamisa -- the talent is thin below the top ranks. The great saving grace of the opposition is likely to be found in the Diaspora. Most of Zimbabwe’s best professionals, entrepreneurs, businessmen and women, etc., have fled the country. They are the opposition’s natural allies and it is encouraging to see signs, particularly in South Africa and the UK, that these people are talking, sharing ideas, developing plans and thinking together about future recovery.

Unfortunately, among the MDC’s flaws is its inability to work more effectively with the rest of civil society. The blame for this can be shared on both sides (many civil society groups, like the NCA, are single-issue focused and take the overall dynamic in unhelpful directions; others, like WOZA, insist on going it alone as a matter of principle), but ultimately it falls to the MDC as the largest and the only true political party, to show the way.

Once again, however, these are natural allies and they have more reason to work together than fight against each other.

STAYING THE COURSE, PREPARING FOR CHANGE

If I am right and change is in the offing, we need to step up our preparations. The work done over the last year on transition planning has been extremely useful, both for stimulating a fresh look at our own assumptions and plans and for forging a common approach among the traditional donor community. But the process has lagged since the meetings in March in London and should be re-energised.

It is encouraging in this respect that USAID Washington has engaged the Mission here in discussing how we would use additional resources in response to a genuinely reform-minded government. I hope this will continue and the good work done so far will survive the usual bloodletting of the budget process.

The official media has had a field day recently whooping that "Dell leaves Zimbabwe a failed man". That's not quite how it looks from here. I believe that the firm U.S. stance, the willingness to speak out and stand up, have contributed to the accelerating pace of change. Mugabe and his henchman are like bullies everywhere: if they can intimidate you they will. But they’re not used to someone standing up to them and fighting back. It catches them off guard and that's when they make mistakes.

The howls of protest over critical statements from Washington or negative coverage on CNN are the clearest proof of how this hurts them. Ditto the squeals over illegal sanctions. In addition, the regime has become so used to calling the shots and dictating the pace that the merest stumble panics them. Many local observers have noted that Mugabe is panicked and desperate about hyperinflation at the moment, and hence he’s making mistakes. Possibly fatal mistakes.

We need to keep the pressure on in order to keep Mugabe off his game and on his back foot, relying on his own shortcomings to do him in. Equally important is an active U.S. leadership role in the international community. The UK is ham-strung by its colonial past and domestic politics, thus, letting them set the pace alone merely limits our effectiveness. The EU is divided between the hard north and its soft southern underbelly. The Africans are only now beginning to find their voice. Rock solid partners like Australia don’t pack enough punch to step out front and the UN is a non-player. Thus it falls to the U.S., once again, to take the lead, to say and do the hard things and to set the agenda.

Hundreds, maybe thousands, of ordinary Zimbabweans of all kinds have told me that our clear, forthright stance has given them hope and the courage to hang on. By this regime’s standards, acting in the interests of the people may indeed be considered a failure. But I believe that the opposite is true, and that we can be justifiably proud that in Zimbabwe we have helped advance the President’s freedom agenda. The people of this country know it and recognise it and that is the true touchstone of our success here. DELL

Grace Mugabe linked to Chinese mafia

HARARE – Zimbabwe’s First Lady Grace Mugabe has been linked to the Chinese mafia, in startling revelations that are said to have caused some diplomatic discomfort between Harare and Beijing and were the main reason for last month’s purge on companies mining the controversial Marange diamond fields.

According to Africa Confidential, President Robert Mugabe was told by the Chinese government that his wife Grace – who is reportedly pursuing her own mining interests in the controversial diamond fields – was dealing with dubious traders from Hong Kong where she has property investments.

“Senior Chinese officials, including President Hu Jintao, were concerned enough about this relationship to inform President Mugabe personally that these Hong Kong traders had links to Triad criminal syndicates, which have already established a strong base in South Africa,” said the London-based publications, among the leading specialist journals on Africa.

The Triad is a Chinese organised crime organisation involved in extortion, money laundering, human trafficking and prostitution.

Mugabe, who is said to be furious at the diplomatic embarrassment caused by these revelations and security breaches, has ordered an investigation of all the entities operating in Marange.

“The first victims of the presidential order were the directors of Canadile Miners, one of the two officially sanctioned companies exploiting the Marange field,” Africa Confidential said.

Canadile directors and officials from the Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC) were arrested in Mutare last month in the course of what was billed as a government crackdown on illicit mining and smuggling.

Canadile is a joint venture of the South African firm Core Mining and Minerals and the state-owned ZMDC.

The Zimbabwe government cancelled Canadile’s diamond claims in November and announced it was taking control of the joint mining venture following allegations that the firm’s fraudulently acquired mining concessions in Marange.

Chiadzwa is one of the world’s most controversial diamond fields with reports that soldiers sent to guard the claims after the government took over the field in October 2006 from ACR committed gross human rights abuses against illegal miners who had descended on the field.

Zim to nationalise alluvial diamonds

HARARE – Zimbabwe’s government is nationalising all alluvial diamond deposits while the state will assume controlling stake in all future mining ventures involving other minerals including gold, platinum and non-alluvial diamonds, economic indigenisation Minister Saviour Kasukuwere said Wednesday.

At present, the government holds 50 percent stakes in each of the companies that are mining alluvial diamonds in the controversial Marange fields to the north of the country.

Addressing journalists in Harare, Kasukuwere said the ruling coalition of President Robert Mugabe and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai had unanimously agreed on the sweeping changes that although targeting new projects are certain to leave investors in established mines wondering about how safe their investments are in Zimbabwe.

Kasukuwere said: “At its weekly sitting…cabinet took far reaching decisions on the issue of implementation of Indigenisation and Empowerment Act in general and the mining sector in particular.

“The shareholding in the mining sector as it relates to the state shall be as follows, 100 percent for alluvial diamonds.”

According to the regulations, government would establish a ‘Sovereign Wealth Fund’ to function as a vehicle through which the state will acquire controlling stake in all new mining ventures that do not involve alluvial diamonds.

Kasukuwere said once the new rules came into force, communities would now get 10 percent of gross profit from the exploitation of their mineral resources. He said the new rules would become effective once gazzeted but did not say when exactly that would be.

“Cabinet resolved that through a Community Share Ownership Scheme…communities shall be entitled to 10 percent of profit before tax,” he said.

The minister said the funds would be channeled towards supporting new health, education and infrastructural projects in communities.

Government would soon be announcing new guidelines on how the controversial Indigenisation Act would be implemented in other sectors of the economy, he said.

Meanwhile, Kasukuwere dismissed claims by Minister of Industry and Commerce Professor Welshman Ncube that government had suspended implementation of the Indigenisation regulations.

“Let me say that the Minister of Youth Development, Indigenisation and

Empowerment remains the sole mouthpiece on issues of indigenisation and empowerment. We have not frozen indigenisation,” he said.

Under the empowerment programme, foreign-owned firms are required to cede significant stake to local blacks by 2015 and those failing to comply risk losing their operating licenses.

Mugabe, whose then sole ruling ZANU PF party passed the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Bill in 2007, had initially wanted all foreign-owned firms to cede 51 percent stake to locals.

He backed down after Tsvangirai opposed the requirement to force all foreigners to surrender control of their investments and the coalition government later modified the rules to allow varying percentages of shareholding foreign-owned companies in various sectors of the economy must transfer to local blacks.

The committees appointed to recommend to the government the various shareholding thresholds are yet to report back to Kasukuwere.

Analysts say the empowerment drive is unlikely to succeed as most local business people are unable to raise the required funding to buy shares from foreign-owned companies.

A similar empowerment drive by Mugabe in agriculture destroyed the mainstay sector, leaving once self sufficient Zimbabwe dependent on food aid after the 86-year old leader failed to provide funding, inputs and skills training to black villagers resettled on former white-owned commercial farms to maintain production.

And critics fear that the economic empowerment is a ploy by Mugabe to reward his allies and supporters with thriving businesses in the same way his top backers in his ZANU PF party and the military were rewarded with the best farms grabbed from whites.

Large multinational corporations such as cigarette manufacturer BAT Zimbabwe, which is 80 percent British-owned; UK-controlled financial institutions Barclays Bank and Standard Chartered Bank, food group Nestlé Zimbabwe, mining giants Rio Tinto and Zimplats, and AON Insurance are some of the big foreign-owned firms that will be forced to cede control to locals. – ZimOnline.

US$1 billion Marange diamonds looted

HARARE -- Diamonds worth as much as US$ 1 billion could have been illegally mined at the Marange fields, mostly by the Zimbabwean army and the proceeds used to partly finance a campaign of violence to keep Mugabe in power while some were pocketed by members of Zimbabwe’s top military brass, ministers and President Mugabe and his wife.

While the true extent of theft of diamonds from Marange and the identities of all involved in the looting will probably never be known in the absence of an independent commission of inquiry, however, extensive investigations by ZimOnline have shown the military at the center of a well-orchestrated scheme to siphon gems from the controversial fields (also known as Chiadzwa) for delivery on the international black market for precious stones.

According to our investigations, including interviews with well-placed sources in the army, police and at the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ), most of the diamonds illicitly mined at Marange from 2006 to 2008 by the Zimbabwe National Army, after it evicted illegal panners and took control of the rich alluvial deposits were largely smuggled to India and Dubai and proceeds were laundered into offshore accounts and others held at the RBZ.

The black market sales were done outside the Kimberly Process, which certifies diamonds for sale on the international market.

Investigations show that the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, through its governor and Mugabe’s private banker Gideon Gono, was central in facilitating the movement of proceeds from the illegal mining activities and their diversions into various accounts.

After Mugabe’s ZANU PF lost the parliamentary and presidential elections in March 2008 to Morgan Tsvangirai’s MDC, the Joint Operations Command (JOC), the secretive committee of securocrats running Zimbabwe convened to map a violent strategy to ensure that Mugabe would win the run-off presidential election.

The JOC includes the Zimbabwe Defence Forces (ZDF)’s top military commander General Constantine Chiwenga, army commander Philip Sibanda, air force commander Perence Shiri, police chief Augustine Chihuri, secret service director general Happyton Bonyongwe and prisons commander Paradzai Zimondi.

Electoral violence

What followed the committee’s meeting was probably the worst electoral violence ever seen in Zimbabwe.

Despite not being a military man, Gono sat on the JOC and ensured that money from illegal diamond proceeds was funnelled to fund a violent campaign which saw more than 220 senior army officers being deployed across the country to coordinate the campaign of violence towards the bloody presidential run-off on June 27, 2008 won by Mugabe.

Two senior army officers were posted per each district to coordinate the violence which involved ZANU PF youths, police, and ordinary soldiers.

The seniors were later rewarded handsomely with some getting as much as US$20 000 each long before Zimbabwe introduced dollarisation. Despite the foreign currency shortages then, plenty cash remained available to fund those key senior army officers central to Mugabe’s power grabbing plans.

The ensuing violence forced Morgan Tsvangirai – who analysts had tipped to win the second round ballot after defeating Mugabe in the first round vote -- to withdraw from the presidential run-off. The MDC claims more than 200 of its supporters were killed, some burnt alive, while tens of thousands were left homeless or injured.

ZimOnline is also authoritatively informed that it was via money from the diamond proceeds that Gono funnelled millions of dollars to accounts held by Grace Mugabe in Malaysia and Hong Kong.

Mugabe’s wife travels frequently to Hong Kong where the first family has invested in a lavish lifestyle including a mansion in which their daughter, Bona, who has been attending university there lives. They also own properties in Malaysia.

After her shopping trips to Harrods in the United Kingdom and choice shops in France, Italy and Spain were curtailed by European Union sanctions imposed over human rights abuses, Mrs Mugabe had shifted her shopping sprees to Asia, particularly Hong Kong, Singapore and Malaysia.

Chiwenga and Shiri, one of Mugabe’s most trusted allies, Zimondi, the late Vitalis Zvinavashe, Chiwenga’s predecessor at the helm of the ZDF, various heads of key military brigades, senior CIO officials had handsomely benefited from the proceeds of smuggled Marange diamonds.

“The same way the military top brass used Harare as a transit route for diamonds smuggled out of the Congo when Zimbabwe deployed troops there in the late 1990s replayed itself with Marange diamonds....,” said a military source, speaking on condition he was not named for fear of possible reprisals.

One retired senior Zimbabwe army official is said to have moved more than R40 million to a South African bank from proceeds of Marange diamonds sold illegally in India. This particular official and the bank concerned, one of the major four concerned cannot be named for legal reasons.

But it is common cause that some ministers, particularly Mines Minister Obert Mpofu, who has been regularly linked to shady deals at Marange, are now fabulously rich owning vast properties around Zimbabwe which cannot be afforded by their measly salaries as government officials.

Tendai Biti, the Minister of Finance in the unity government recently complained that US$ 30 million raised sales of diamonds of Marange stones could not be accounted for.

But sources say the amount identified by Biti as missing was only the tip of the iceberg and that the Finance Minister would never be able to know the exact figure involved because of the sophisticated laundering that took place.

Private jets

On several occasions, private jets of wealthy Indians would land at Harare International Airport to pick up diamonds mined from Marange. The payments would then be done offshore. No documentation would be left making it near impossible to trace the illegal exports.

“If you consider all the rot that Mugabe has allowed his top military men to get away with, it all then explains why they want him to die in power and their legendary resistance to Tsvangirai,” said one source close to the RBZ.

The looting of the Marange diamonds continued when the army started ceding control of the Marange fields to the Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC) until the mining rights over Marange were granted to two companies, Canadile and Mbada Diamonds, both with no traceable credentials in the diamond mining trade.

But while some ZMDC officials are now in court over their alleged looting, sources say Zimbabweans should not expect the senior army officials, and other politicians who benefited from the looting of Marange diamonds to ever be seen in the dock – at least not when they are still the bedrock of Mugabe’s power.

The six ZMDC mining executives arraigned in court are accused of stealing US$10 million from Marange proceeds through fraud and misrepresentations of diamond sales. Another US$33 million could also have been lost in the process.

These disclosures also came against a background that one of the mining companies in Chiadzwa, Canadile Miners, which has since been booted out of the contested diamond fields, has been smuggling diamonds out of Marange through Mozambique and selling them on the black market.

Ironically, government blames Canadile directors for smuggling diamonds out of the country mainly through Mozambique to sell them in the black market in Dubai, India and China, the key markets for the Marange gems.

September fallout

Canadile was recommended to Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC) executives by Mines Minister Mpofu who in turn urged Mugabe to approve its mining deal.

Mugabe and Mpofu defended the company until there was a fallout over the control of the mining and sale of the diamonds in September between Canadile deputy chairman Lovemore Kurotwi and the minister.

Mpofu was accused by Kurotwi in a meeting with Mugabe in September of soliciting for bribes. Mpofu acknowledged in a meeting with ZMDC officials on September 20 that he was accused by Kurotwi of asking for bribes, but tried to pre-empt speculation that he was receiving bribes and a lot of corrupt payments to facilitate mining deals.

Aware that people were accusing him of taking bribes and corruptly enriching himself through the Chiadzwa diamonds, Mpofu himself said there was a “plethora of rumours, insinuations and allegations being leveled against him” and the ZMDC board.

Mpofu has been on a buying spree, purchasing real estate and housing properties mainly in Harare, Bulawayo and Victoria falls. This invited suspicions from the public and members of a parliamentary portfolio committee which investigated the Marange diamonds affairs earlier this year.

Mpofu has bought one of the tallest buildings in Bulawayo –York House – and has splashed thousands of dollars on high-value properties in Victoria Falls and Bulawayo.

Two cruise boats

A document listing Mpofu’s properties shows that he bought a supermarket in Victoria Falls’ Chinotimba high density suburb, three houses in a medium-density area, two cruise boats on the Zambezi, five houses in Mkhosana high density suburb, three houses in Chinotimba, two industrial stands, one large stand in Chisuma, one big industrial stand next to Chinotimba stadium, four industrial stands on the Airport road, and four medium density plots.

Mpofu reportedly bought all these properties for cash!

Even though he has a farm and supermarkets, sources close to him say that he has no such financial capacity to buy all these properties, especially for cash. Before dollarisation, he earned largely worthless Zimbabwe dollars after the collapse of the Zimbabwe dollar in 1997. After dollarisation Mpofu – like all civil servants – earns a little more than US$300.

Mpofu has however denied he was using diamonds proceeds to buy personal properties. He said he got a US$1 million loan from the Commerciial Bank of Zimbabwe through his company Trebo and Khays Pvt Ltd.

Documents show that Mpofu indeed got a loan from CBZ. This is contained in a facility letter dated October 26 2009. Mpofu the signed a loan agreement for and on behalf of Trebo and Khays (Pvt) Ltd with a woman named Sikhanyisiwe Mpofu, presumably his wife or daughter.

The loan agreement was signed on December 2 2009 and expired on October 31 this year by which date all the monies due should have been repaid.

Mpofu has reportedly repaid the loan, raising further questions about his sources of income which appears well beyond his means. In any event, the CBZ loan, now Jewel Bank, was very inadequate to enable Mpofu to purchase all the properties that is registered in the names of his entities and a plethora of others he has registered in the names of relatives.

The purpose of the loan was given as to finance capital expenditure requirements. However, sources said the loan was used to mask his source of income because growing suspicions he was minting at Chiadzwa, together with other politicians and their business cronies.

The security for the loan – which represented a line of credit - included: Trebo and Khays directors’ personal guarantees for all sums due supported by first mortgage bond for US$1,4 million over stand 12265A in Bulawayo; cession of insurance policy covering the mortgaged property and cession of revenue generated from property lease rental income valued at US$82 000.

Mpofu gave his address of service as Stand 123, 4th Avenue and Fife Street, Bulawayo, a hint at the various properties he owns in the Bulawayo and elsewhere. Mpofu has mansions in Harare and Bulawayo, placing himself well above the level of prosperity of an ordinary minister and even businessman.

Ministers have since last year been earning a paltry US$350 a month, after it was increased from the US$150. Even those with farms and safari concessions seized from white farmers like Mpofu have been struggling due to lower productivity and poor management. So there is simply no way Mpofu’s wealth could have been generated from any viable business he controls.

Massive looting

The government took over the Marange fields ostensibly to ensure revenue from the diamonds is channeled into public coffers. But those in the know say the involvement of the government and particularly the army has only helped to give a cover of legitimacy to massive looting of a key national resource.

Independent mining executives estimate that diamonds worth more than US$1 billion could have been smuggled out of the country and sold in the black market over the years including after the arrival of the two dubious South African companies to partner government in the Marange diamond ventures. "Diamonds worth more than US$1 billion have been looted in Marange since 2006," a senior mining executive said.

"The pillaging was done by the soldiers, the diamond exploration and mining companies and artisanal miners; other state security agents; politicians, dealers, crooks and criminals."

Well places sources interviewed described the Chiadzwa diamond mining story as a tale of fraud, smuggling, bribery and outright theft. It is riddled with corruption, including buying-offs and paying-off of dodgy mining dealers, smugglers and politicians, and a scandalous waste of public funds. The Zimbabwean public has not benefitted in a meaningful way from the Marange diamonds.

Mbada is a joint venture between the state-owned Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC)’s wholly-owned subsidiary Marange Resources and South Africa’s New Reclamation Group special purpose vehicle, Grandwell Holdings registered in Mauritius.

Canadile was a joint venture between ZMDC’s Marange Resources and South Africa’s Core Mining and Minerals.

ZMDC, through Marange Resources, concluded Memoranda of Agreement with New Reclamation Group and Core Mining for exploration of the Marange diamonds in July last year. The agreements were transitory for a period of three months within which the investors were to mobilise money and equipment to fulfill certain conditions precedent.

Even though New Reclamation and Core Mining failed to fulfill their promises, especially of investing US$100 million each, they were allowed in and continued to extract and sell the diamonds mainly for their benefit. Even some basic tenets of the agreements were violated such as making retired Air Vice-Marshal Robert Mhlanga the chairman of Mbada when the agreement said the chairman would come from ZMDC.

Scrap metal dealers

During parliamentary hearings into the Chiadzwa mining issues this earlier this year, it became clear that so many things, including Mhlanga being Mbada chairman, were imposed by government for reasons never explained.

Despite all the information and credibility gaps of the individuals and companies trying to mine in Marange, the shareholders’ agreement between ZMDC and New Reclamation was signed on August 14, 2009, while the one between ZMDC and Core Mining was signed on August 14, 2009.

The companies were given permission to mine the Marange mining title which covers 66 000 hectares. There is an attempt to increase the area to cover a vast 123 000 hectares.

The companies initially shortlisted to partner ZMDC included Benny Steinmetz Group Resources Limited (BSGR), New Reclamation Group, Southern African Investment and Infrastructure Company and Namakwa Diamonds. Other companies also engaged over the diamond investment issues include Community Energy, WMJ Lotter Consultants and Elkhart Mining.

However, New Reclamation and Core Mining were chosen even though Core Mining was not even initially on the shortlist. What was surprising was that the South African companies – which had no mining experience and capacity - were chosen ahead of several other more qualified candidates.

New Reclamation Group is a scrap metal company which a dubious record, while Core Mining is a shady company whose directors have been linked to smuggling in Angola and Mozambique and other sleazy activities like mercenary operations in Sierra Leone.

South Africa's highest competition authority, the Competition Tribunal, in 2008 fined New Reclamation R145 million for its involvement in collusion and price fixing in the ferrous and nonferrous scrap metals.

Part II: Complex plots and sub-plots

The Chiadzwa diamond mining saga has complex plots and sub-plots. It involves a chain of companies and individuals with a shady past and whose records are difficult to trace — in some cases for that reason.

The issue has its genesis in 2002 when South African diamond mining giant De Beers’ subsidiary, Kimberlitic Searches (Pvt) Ltd, was granted a four-year Exclusive Prospecting Order (EPO) in Chiadzwa. The EPO expired on March 28 2006.

Africa Consolidated Resources (ACR), which is registered in the London Stock Exchange, has been fighting ZMDC in the courts over the Chiadzwa diamond concessions. The fight has had many twists and turns and remains in the courts despite that in the last round that High Court judge, Justice Charles Hungwe had ruled in favour of ZMDC after reversing his own earlier ruling made last year.

The history of the fight between ZMDC and ACR is intriguing.

After Kimberlitic Searches’ EPO had expired, ACR proceeded to peg claims in the disputed area (EOP 1523) and applied for registration of numerous blocks of claims in the names of Canape Investments (Pvt) Ltd, Dashaloo Investments, Possession Investments, Heavy Stuff Investment and Olebile Investment.

ACR was then granted a diamond prospecting licence on April 4 2006. On July 21 2006 a Mutare assistant mining commissioner wrote to ACR saying their claims had been cancelled because Kimberlitic Searches had already submitted an application for an extension of the EPO.

On September 15 the Mining Commissioner in Harare wrote to ACR saying the letter rescinding their claims was incorrect and that the claims were still valid.

In August 2006 the then Mines minister Amos Midzi reserved an area which included ACR claims.

In September the minister wrote to MMCZ advising them that he had reserved an area incorporating ACR claims to prevent illegal activities. He also said MMCZ must facilitate investment with local and foreign companies.

Later in the same month Midzi visited the area with MMCZ officials and addressed illegal miners telling them that MMCZ was the only authority lawfully permitted on the site.

Boxes of diamonds

In October he warned ACR to stop clearing and fencing the claims. In November the assistant mining commissioner for Mutare told ACR that he had been instructed by his head office to cancel their claims.

In January 2007 ACR chief executive Andrew Cranswick was summoned to Borrowdale police station in Harare where police seized three sealed boxes containing 129 400 carats of diamonds.

These are the diamonds the Supreme Court in January ruled should be kept at the Reserve Bank until the case is finalised. Police had seized the diamonds in violation of the Supreme Court ruling.

Mugabe and Mines Minister Mpofu defended the move, risking criminal contempt of court charges.

Mineral claims are easy to change ownership because the Mines ministry is riddled with corruption and EPOs are granted and cancelled sometimes depending on who pays the highest “facilitation fee”!

Missing US$30 ml

Before August last year, and particularly before government started mining in Marange, smuggling was the order of the day after villagers invaded Chiadzwa. A thriving diamond underworld market ran unchallenged there since the discovery of diamonds by villagers in 2006. Prior to that there were exploration companies on the ground which were also accused of smuggling as well. So smuggling has been going on for years.

However, the situation took a new and dramatic twist since government’s involvement. Public officials, including politicians, are now directly involved supposedly to protect public resources and public interest, but not much has changed. Smuggling and stealing is still rife.

There has even been controversy about the official sale of diamonds recently under the supervision of Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS). Initial reports said US$72 million worth of diamonds were sold but later government claimed it had only sold gems worth US$56 million. It was never clarified why there were two different figures.

Finance Minister Biti in July raised alarm over some US$30 million realised from diamonds which he said was never declared to Treasury. Mpofu tried to downplay the issue but it was never resolved.

It later resurfaced during internal ZMDC after the company’s directors failed to account for the figure.

Documents show that there was a recent ZMDC inquiry on the usage of US$30 million earned from diamond sales between October 2008 and April this year.

Biti had announced on July 14 during the presentation of his mid-year fiscal policy review statement in parliament that US$30 million realised from diamond sales was missing.

“According to the KPCS monitor, Zimbabwe recently sold at least US$30 million worth of diamonds from Marange which Treasury and ZIMRA (Zimbabwe Revenue Authority) have no record or knowledge of,” Biti said.

KPCS has been involved in trying to ensure Zimbabwe did not trade diamonds outside its processes. Although the KPCS has backed Zimbabwe to export diamonds, Harare’s diamond sales are still conditional and monitored. The KPCS banned Zimbabwe from selling diamonds in May after it was discovered the country was exporting gems illegally, mainly to Dubai.

Government illegally exported diamonds through the back door to Dubai, United Arab Emirates (UAE), in violation of the January Supreme Court ruling which ordered a freeze in all mining activities at the controversial Chiadzwa diamond fields.

Most of the funds obtained from the controversial Dubai diamonds sales were also wired through telegraphic transfers and received through the RBZ, some through CBZ Bank and ABC Bank in Zimbabwe while some of the money was simply stashed offshore.

Evidence show that some of the beneficiaries of the diamond transactions were ZMDC’s Sandawana Mines and Lesley Faye Marsh Jewellers (Pvt) Ltd which trade as Premier Diamonds. It is not clear to whom Premier really belongs to.

Hot air

Mpofu has denied that the US$30 money had vanished and dismissed Biti’s statement as “hot air” but failed to produce evidence to rebut the finance Minister’s claims.

Mpofu said a forensic audit of diamonds mined in the controversial Marange fields was under way and would prove Biti wrong.

But investigations showed that Biti was right after all, except that the figure he mentioned was only the “tip of the iceberg”, according to some key sources.

ZMDC documents say the company’s management recently told board members that ZMDC had sold diamonds worth US$30 million between October 2008 and April 2010.

However, when the board demanded documents to support the assertion and account for the money, the records only showed revenues amounting to US$22 584 347.11. The difference of US$7 415 653.89 was not accounted for.

The issue of how Mbada and Canadile came into the fray has always been simmering.

Documents at hand show that after a due diligence between August 4-6 last year by ZMDC’s select board committee, which included the company’s executive Dominic Mubaiwa, board chairperson Gloria Mawarire, chairperson of the finance and investment committee Ashton Ndlovu, board member Mark Tsomondo and company secretary Tichaona Muhonde, shareholders’ agreements were signed but so many questions remained lingering.

Mubaiwa, Mawarire, Ndlovu, Tsomondo and Muhonde were last week arrested on charges of fraud relating to this due diligence exercise and other issues, including the misappropriation of US$10 million and potentially prejudicing ZMDC of US$33 million.

Canadlie deputy chairman Lovemore Kurotwi, who is also the chairman of Core Mining, was also arrested for allegedly obtaining the diamond mining concessions in a fraudulent manner.

Kurotwi is accused of lying that Core Mining was a special purpose vehicle of global mining giant Benny Steinmetz Group Resources Limited (BSG Resources Ltd) when it was not.

Kurotwi was arrested after he recently accused Mpofu in front of Mugabe of soliciting bribes during the cutting of the controversial diamond deals.

Minutes of a meeting between Mpofu and ZMDC board members held on September 20 at the Mines ministry’s board room say that the minister confirmed that Kurotwi had personally accused him of soliciting bribes in front of Mugabe.

This, among other grounds including fraudulent misrepresentation of Core Mining and Minerals’ corporate profile and investment portfolio, was said to be the reason behind Kurotwi’s arrest.

Obedient Son

Mpofu –– who signed off his letters to Mugabe as “your ever obedient son” –– had initially in the meeting with ZMDC board members started with a disclaimer that there were “rumours, insinuations and allegations” of corruption levelled against him and the board.

He went on to narrate to ZMDC board members his encounter with Kurotwi in a meeting with Mugabe.

“The minister noted that in his meeting with His Excellency (Mugabe), Mr Kurotwi made a number of allegations against him and against the board members,” minutes of the September 20 meeting say.

“Mr Kurotwi alleged that the minister was being a stumbling block to the setting up of the Zimbabwe Diamond Technology Centre which he incorrectly alleges was part of the original joint venture agreement,” the minutes say.

They also say “that board members of the (Zimbabwe) Mining Development Corporation were working in cahoots with the minister against Canadile Miners, that the minister is directing the board to work against him (Kurotwi), that there were attempts from the minister to solicit bribes from him and to divide Core (Mining) shareholders and turn them against Mr Kurotwi.”

Minutes say Kurotwi had accused Mpofu of asking for bribes and trying to divide Core Mining shareholders and turn them against him as the main investor.

Kurotwi grilled

The minutes say instead of confronting Mpofu over Kurotwi’s sensational allegations, Mugabe actually turned against the Canadile and Core Mining executive, grilling him over many issues.

The fallout between Mugabe and Mpofu on the one hand and Kurotwi on the other mostly exposed Mugabe because as he had staked his reputation as president in March this year, claiming the issuing of mining contracts and concessions to what government claimed were “approved strategic investors” in Marange was above board.

When MPs tried to investigate the issue earlier this year, Mugabe in March intervened personally making a spirited defence and justification of the dubious diamond mining arrangements.

“We had a list of companies applying. Finally two of them, Mbada and Canadile, were chosen. They were recommended and I was shown the papers and their proposals. The ministry (of mines) then decided that for now they were preferable to the rest. We said fine. There are the ones who there for now,” Mugabe said.

However, Mugabe’s encounter with Mpofu and Kurotwi reveals that either he just believed what he was told and did not read the “papers and proposals” he said he was shown or he was hoodwinked. It is also possible that are other unknown reasons why Mugabe defended Mbada and Canadile.

During his meeting with Mpofu and Kurotwi in September, Mugabe found himself in an invidious position.

Documents show that after Kurotwi accused Mpofu of soliciting bribes, Mugabe, instead of confronting Mpofu over the sensational allegations, actually turned against Kurotwi and started grilling him over issues which the president himself initially claimed were above board.

Mugabe to the defence

Mugabe asked Kurotwi about Core Mining’s corporate profile, its incorporation and whether it was true that the company was backed by BSG Resources Ltd.

Kurotwi approached Mpofu in March last year saying he was a representative of BSG Resources when he was not.

He then wrote a letter to Mpofu saying he represented Core Mining, purportedly a special purpose vehicle for BSGR which wanted to invest US$2 billion in Marange diamonds.

Kurotwi and ZMDC officials were arrested over this issue over which they are accused of fraudulent misrepresentations and prejudicing ZMDC of US$10 million and trying to defraud the company of US$33 million.

Mugabe, according to the minutes, also asked Kurotwi about his educational background and mining experience. The president also asked him how he expected Mpofu to sanction construction of the diamond centre without approval from his office, showing Mugabe is closely involved in the Chiadzwa diamond mining activities.

Mugabe also queried Kurotwi over the ownership of the land on which the diamond centre was to be built.

Further, Mugabe asked how much Core Mining had invested and why it was unable to bring the US$100 million it promised, as well as why the company had borrowed US$1,5 million from Agribank.

Minutes say Kurotwi did not give Mugabe “credible answers”. After that meeting Mugabe ordered an internal ZMDC investigation which led to the arrest of Kurotwi and five ZMDC officials.

But no one in the know about the Marange affairs expects the army of the law to be long enough to reach, Mugabe, his wife, his army generals and CIO officials who sources allege looted the alluvial deposits the most. – ZimOnline