Mutumwa Mawere’s return critical for Zimbabwe investor confidence Part 1 of 5

Mutumwa Mawere one of Zimbabwe’s business icon “touched down at Harare International Airport at 1355 hours yesterday aboard a British Airways flight from Johannesburg after spending six years “in the wilderness”. This has to be one of the most visible achievement by the Government of National Unity in terms of being progressive and being “business friendly” Mawere’s safe return sends an encouraging signal to investors that indeed Zimbabwe is now on the progressive path to recovery and tolerance.
I personally met Mawere on different occasions in Harare, London and Toronto under different circumstances. When I met him in London one thing me struck most is how relaxed but focused he was on setting the record straight and also impart his vast business knowledge to others.
Below is how he is his early business life is described
“Mutumwa Dziva Mawere (born January 11, 1960 in Bindura, Zimbabwe), is an African business executive, pioneer, financier, banker and entrepreneur best known as the founder and Chairman of Africa Resources Limited ("ARL"). He is known for having built one of the most powerful and influential corporations in Zimbabwe's history called Africa Resources Limited
He was educated in Zimbabwe, Swaziland, United Kingdom and United States. He holds B.Sc (Economics), M.Sc (Management), MBA (Finance & Investments) degrees as well as other professional qualifications.
He began his professional career as an Acturial Student in 1984. He then joined the Industrial Development Corporation of Zimbabwe in late 1984 as a Research Economist and rose through the ranks to become a Senior Research Economist in 1987 before joining the Merchant Bank of Central Africa in the same year as a Corporate Finance Executive.
In 1988, he joined the World Bank as a Young Professional. After completing the program in 1989, he was appointed as an Investment Officer for the International Finance Corporation, the private sector lending arm of the World Bank. He rose through the ranks to become a Senior Investment Officer in 1994. In 1995, he resigned from the World Bank and immigrated to South Africa where he has been based since.
In 1995, he founded Africa Resources Limited (ARL), an investment holding company incorporated under the laws of the British Virgin Island, before moving to South Africa. In August 1995, he approached T & N Plc the UK domiciled parent company of Shabanie & Mashaba Mines Private Limited (SMM) with a proposal to acquire the company's Zimbabwean subsidiaries i.e. the asbestos mines, two Zimbabwean industrial companies and a Zambian manufacturing company. Negotiations began in September 1995.
In November 1995, Mawere formed a partnership with Investec Bank Limited, a South African investment bank, to structure and mobilize financing for a mining private equity fund.

While working on the private equity fund, he continued his negotiations with T & N that culminated in an agreement in March 1996 pursuant to which ARL, a company in which he is the sole shareholder, acquired the remaining mining and industrial assets of T & N in Zimbabwe and Zambia.
Since the acquisition of T & N's two UK based companies that were the sole beneficial owners of the Zimbabwean and Zambian companies, the ARL group of companies grew organically and through acquisitions to become one of the largest and diversified black controlled conglomerates with operations in South Africa, UK, Zambia, Namibia, and Malawi employing about 20,000 people and generating a turnover of about US$400 million.
In 1997, the group established a warehousing and forwarding business, Shipping Consolidated Holdings ("SCH") with operations in Zimbabwe (container depot) and Durban, South Africa (warehouse). Acquired a 100% stake in a cellular service provider, CST Cellular Private Limited, later renamed Firstel Cellular Zimbabwe.

Mawere was the promoter, sponsor and investor in a greenfield commercial bank, FBC Bank ("FBC"). FBC was registered as a commercial bank in February 1997 in accordance with the Zimbabwe Banking Act. FBC is one of the first three commercial banks to be provided with an operating license by the Registrar of Banks and Financial Institutions since 1981. Since opening its first branch in August 1997, FBC has established 14 branch locations countrywide.”
Mawere’s return to Zimbabwe opens a new chapter in Zimbabwe’s business environment as the country seeks to cement its image as an attractive emerging market. If individuals such as Sir Richard Branson are keen to invest in Zimbabwe ,it goes without saying that Zimbabwe’s own leading business people like Mawere must be at the forefront exploiting business opportunities that are so abundant in Zimbabwe.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 6 of 10)

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 6 of 10)
Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank clearly have no answer to the fact that they irregularly and illegally grabbed Century /CFX Bank but avoidance, pretentiousness and pretense driven by misleading their lawyers and misinforming the investing public and regulatory Authorities.
.Given that High Court case HC-6244-04 is still before the courts it is a puzzling mystery that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank even had enough guts to go and convince a respectable lawyer such as Mr Sternford Moyo to provide a legal opinion based on incomplete facts. This is shocking for a Banker to go and mislead a respectable senior lawyer of Mr Moyo’s experience and stature.
This clearly shows that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank did not do a proper due diligence exercise.If they had done a complete and proper due diligence they would have discovered that High Court case HC-6244-04 blocking the illegal sale and transfer of Century Bank is still pending before the courts.

In addition Farai Rwodzi and Interfin should have followed the basics of a due diligence listed below ;


INSURANCE
A. List and description of all material property, casualty, liability and other insurance policies
B. Any directors' and officers' liability insurance policies
C. Description of present reserves for, and all potential claims with respect to, any self-insurance
D. History of all insured claims including paid, reserved, and related expense amounts (first dollar loss run)
E. Loss runs for workers' compensation and general liability
F. Loss history for any self-insurance (first dollar loss run)
G. Loss prevention/control recommendations made by insurers, brokers or consultants
SALES/MARKETING

A. Description of the markets in which the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries operate, identifying the type of customers and the size of the overall market (by value)
B. Identify any customers which account for more than 1% of annual sales of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries or, if there are more than ten such customers, the ten largest customers
1. The quarterly totals of sales
2. Details of current sales order statistics available to management
3. Sales comparison with the industry
4. Copies of standard sales correspondence, returns and allowance material together with samples of all forms of purchase orders, invoices, warranty agreements, guarantees, etc
5. Details of pricing policies and fluctuations
6. Copies of all printed price lists
7. Identification of principal competitors, a description of the basis of competition and the strength and weaknesses of the principal competitors
8. Indication of the relative size of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries within the industry. Details of trade associations relating to the business and any company memberships
9. Details of current advertising program (including copies of all promotional or other material used or capable of use in connection with the business) and the cost of the same and any other promotion programs
10. Details of sales policies and methods of remuneration of sales personnel

11. The policy on giving express product warranties and rights to customers to refunds, exchanges or credits following a purchase and the value of refunds, exchanges or credits given and warranty claims
12. List the 10 largest suppliers
13. Current research and development plans and budgets
14. Correspondence and other documents relating to negotiations with competitors of the Company
15. Consultants', engineers' or management reports and marketing studies relating to broad aspects of the business, operations or products
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Press releases
B. Listing and description of subsidiaries, joint ventures, partnerships, etc.
C. Description of any future acquisition or disposition plans
D. Description of any future restructuring plans
E. Description of Company's information management system, including any future changes planned.

It is clear that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation avoided a proper due diligence exercise which would have revealed the existence of High Court Case HC-6244-04 challenging the illegal and irregular transfer of Century Bank into CFX Bank then finally into Interfin Banking Corporation. No amount of rebranding or renaming will conceal this fraudulent transactions all designed to hide the illegal nature of the underlying activities.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 5 of 10)

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 5 of 10)
Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank clearly have no honest answer to the fact that they irregularly and illegally grabbed Century /CFX Bank hide behind conflicting advice which was obtained through manipulation and partial information disclosure.
Given that High Court case HC-6244-04 challenging mthe illegal and irregular transfer of the 309 million Century Shares is still before the courts it is a puzzling mystery that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank even had enough guts to go and convince a respectable lawyer such as Mr Sternford Moyo to provide a legal opinion based on incomplete facts.
Such is the desperation that Rwodzi and Interfin ended up relying on an opinion by Mr Moyo which opinion is in direct contradiction to the one given by Mr Addington Chinake on the same transaction.

Mr Chinake concluded that since Gilbert Muponda is specified he has no rights to challenge the illegal transfer of Century to CFX Bank then into Interfin Banking Corporation.Yet given the same facts Mr Sternford Moyo states that I have legal right to challenge the illegal sale and transfer of the Bank and block the subsequent laundering attempts of renaming the Bank CFX and then Interfin Banking Corporation.

This clearly shows that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank did not do a proper due diligence exercise.If they had done a complete and proper due diligence they would have discovered that High Court case HC-6244-04 blocking the illegal sale and transfer of Century Bank is still pending before the courts.

In addition Farai Rwodzi and Interfin should have followed the basics of a due diligence listed below ;


“ PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
A. General

1. List and details of any material Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) registered or for which applications for registration have been, including, patents, licenses, trademarks, trade names, domain names, copyrights and other intellectual property rights (including technology transfers)
2. Particulars of any license, royalty and other intellectual property agreements (where the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries is licensor or licensee)
3. List and description of any pending or threatened claims for infringement or other violations of proprietary rights owned or used in the business of the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries, including any challenges as to the validity, subsistence or ownership of such rights
4. List and description of any suspected or alleged infringement by third parties of intellectual property rights owned by the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries, or used in their business
5. Arrangements for the disclosure of confidential information (which includes technical and commercial information and know-how which is not in the public domain) either by or to the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries
6. Details of any agreements with employees and consultants regarding their use of the confidential information of the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries
7. Agreements, policies or other arrangements relating to proprietary rights of employees in products of the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries (including royalty or other fee arrangements)


VII. PLANT, PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
A. Real Property
1. Description, location and character of all real property owned
2. Material deeds, surveys and other real property title documents
3. List of any material real property mortgages which are not disclosed in most recent financial statements
4. List of all leased real property, including descriptions, terms of leases, sale and leaseback arrangements, options, annual costs, etc.
5. Reporting letters and opinions regarding the acquisition of any material real property
6. List of title insurance policies
B. Personal Property
1. Description, location and character of all personal property owned
2. List of all material leased personal property, including descriptions, terms of leases, options, annual costs, etc.
C. Miscellaneous
1. Description of facilities and plant, including listing of all material fixed assets and accumulated depreciation
2. Any available appraisals
VIII. INSURANCE
A. List and description of all material property, casualty, liability and other insurance policies
B. Any directors' and officers' liability insurance policies
C. Description of present reserves for, and all potential claims with respect to, any self-insurance
D. History of all insured claims including paid, reserved, and related expense amounts (first dollar loss run)
E. Loss runs for workers' compensation and general liability
F. Loss history for any self-insurance (first dollar loss run)
G. Loss prevention/control recommendations made by insurers, brokers or consultants
IX. SALES/MARKETING

A. Description of the markets in which the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries operate, identifying the type of customers and the size of the overall market (by value)
B. Identify any customers which account for more than 1% of annual sales of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries or, if there are more than ten such customers, the ten largest customers
1. The quarterly totals of sales
2. Details of current sales order statistics available to management
3. Sales comparison with the industry
4. Copies of standard sales correspondence, returns and allowance material together with samples of all forms of purchase orders, invoices, warranty agreements, guarantees, etc
5. Details of pricing policies and fluctuations
6. Copies of all printed price lists
7. Identification of principal competitors, a description of the basis of competition and the strength and weaknesses of the principal competitors
8. Indication of the relative size of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries within the industry. Details of trade associations relating to the business and any company memberships
9. Details of current advertising program (including copies of all promotional or other material used or capable of use in connection with the business) and the cost of the same and any other promotion programs
10. Detailsofsalesocies and methods of remuneration of sales personnel

11. The policy on giving express product warranties and rights to customers to refunds, exchanges or credits following a purchase and the value of refunds, exchanges or credits given and warranty claims
12. List the 10 largest suppliers
13. Current research and development plans and budgets
14. Correspondence and other documents relating to negotiations with competitors of the Company
15. Consultants', engineers' or management reports and marketing studies relating to broad aspects of the business, operations or products
X. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Press releases
B. Listing and description of subsidiaries, joint ventures, partnerships, etc.
C. Description of any future acquisition or disposition plans
D. Description of any future restructuring plans
E. Description of Company's information management system, including any future changes planned.”

These are basic steps that would have highlighted the exixstance of High Court Case HC-6244-04 which would have provided Mr Moyo and Mr Farai Rwodzi an accurate picture before misleading the investing public.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 5 of 5

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 5 of 5

Interfin Bank Directors seem to be ill advised and practizing massive self-deception on a grand scale. It is well documented and in public domain that I challenged the illegal sale and or transfer of Century bank through High Court case HC-6244-04.Yet they go ahead and somehow convince a Lawyer of Mr Sternford Moyo’s standing to issue a legal opinion that has an effect of breaking the ZSE Act and mislead the investing public. This is a serious offence under the ZSE Act, Company Act and other Zimbabwean laws that govern director fiduciary duties.
These Directors need to know that in their personal capacity they could be fired, tried and convicted for lying to minority shareholders and the Investing public...their employer.

Everyone wants the money, but it pretty much amounts to selling your soul when supposedly respected members of the comm7unity such as Bank directors willingly mislead the regulatory bodies such as The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Stock Exchange ,Ministry of Finance, Securities Commission etc.


The ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE ACTActs 27/1973, 24/1975, 15/1981, 20/1984; R.G.Ns 54/1975; 1135/1975, S.Is 468/1979, 236/1980. Is clear on this. Below is an extract from the ZSE act which Interfin Banking Corporation Directors ought to be familiar with since they run a Company governed by this act.


“73 Prohibition of fraudulent acts or of carrying on business of stock exchange
(1) No person shall—
(a) make or cause or permit to be made in any document or return which
is required by or under this Act to be sent to the Secretary, the Minister, the Registrar,
the Committee, the Exchange auditor or an auditor referred to in paragraph (d) of
section forty-six a statement which he knows to be false or does not know or believe
to be true; or
(b) by addition, alteration, erasure or omission falsify any document or
return referred to in paragraph (a); or
(c) by any statement, promise or forecast which he knows to be false or
does not know or believe to be true induce any other person to purchase or sell any
securities; or
(d) directly or indirectly use or take part in any manipulative or deceptive
method of dealing in listed securities likely to stimulate further dealings in listed
securities or any class or classes thereof on the Exchange; or
(e) by means of fictitious transactions or the spreading of false reports
influence the prices of listed securities or any class or classes thereof on the
Exchange.”
Practizing self deception at an alarming scale when they willingly break the relevant Governing Act .This act is freely available on the internet and Interfin Bank Directors need to familiarize themselves .The direct link is here http://www.parlzim.gov.zw/cms/Acts/Title24_COMMERCIAL_AND_FINANCIAL_INSTITUTIONS/ZIMBABWE_STOCK_EXCHANGE_ACT_24_18.pdf
Interfin Banking Corporation Directors seem to be practizing moral flexibility whilst bending rules and regulations to conceal their prior knowledge of a legitimate claim which they with held informing their employers who are the Investing public who are protected by the ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE ACT Acts 27/1973, 24/1975, 15/1981, 20/1984; R.G.Ns 54/1975; 1135/1975, S.Is 468/1979, 236/1980.

High Court Case HC-6244-04 was filed in 2004 and its still pending before the courts. Yet Interfin Banking Corporation Directors pretend there was never any challenge to their illegal and irregular grabbing of Century/CFX Bank.

By will fully and deliberately misleading the Investing Public in violation of the ZSE Act Interfin Banking Corporation is an organization that has re-defined the definition of corruption , deceit and concealment of material information from Investing public and Regulatory Authorities.


This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 4 of 5

Mr Sternford Moyo’s claim that there was never an objection to the sale and or transfer of the Century Shares into CFX Bank shares then Interfin Bank shares can not go unchallenged .His opinion must be put under an intregrity test and be compared to publicly available information.

In my original article titled “Gilbert Muponda: Further Revelations on the Century/CFX bank Fraud”
Published more than a year ago on Sep 28th, 2009 and filed under Financial News, which appeared in many newspapers including The Zimbabwe Metro Newspaper I made it clear there was already a High Court case blocking the illegal sale and transfer of the 309 Million Century Shares. The relevant link is here http://www.zimbabwemetro.com/finance/gilbert-muponda-further-revelations-on-the-centurycfx-bank-fraud/

Therefore anyone who did a serious due diligence would have discovered that the dealing in such shares was null and void in addition to being illegal and fraudulent as it was misleading the investing public.

Below is the full article wherein I made it clear High Court Case HC 6244-04 had been set in motion and therefore any dealing in the said 309 million Century shares and any attempt to conceal the original fraudulent transfer will constitute further unacceptable fraudulent behavior and decepit meant to mislead regulatory Authorities and the General Investing public

The original article -
“It appears there is a misunderstanding on why I have been publishing letters relating to claim for ownership of 309 million Century/CFX Bank shares. In addition some have asked why the matter is being raised 5 years after the 309 Million shares were irregularly sold and transferred.

When the sale was done on or around 12 May 2004 I through my lawyers Ziweni and Company filed a high court application to block the sale of the shares. This record should still be there at the HarareHigh Court. As soon as we filed this application I was then specified without a hearing. This limited my ability to follow up the application. My lawyer and his firm was also specified. Leaving me without legal representation on the matter.

This was all done to ensure that the 309 million shares are sold, transferred and Century/CFX Bank is snatched from my Company – ENG Capital.
Several articles have been written highlighting how these 309 million shares and Century/CFX bank was grabbed from ENG Capital. Over the time we had hoped the current and previous Directors and Management of CFX Bank would reach out and try to find out what really transpired and resolve our claim. This is the normal way of doing business.

If you hear someone claiming ownership of your Bank or business you are expected to confront or engage that person to verify the nature of their claim. The CFX Bank Board, Management and shareholders somehow made the arrogant decision to behave as if everything is normal and totally disregard a claim which has been documented even at High court since day one of the fraudulent merger between Century and CFX Bank.

Even the latest press comments by the Bank through an individual identified as its Lawyer it appears they want to keep hiding behind technicalities such as you should have raised the claim earlier or you are specified therefore you cant act on your own behalf. This is inaccurate and misleading.

This level of arrogance and total disregard of material facts and potential impact on investors is an attitude which must be challenged and stopped. As out lined above this matter was filed at the high court in May 2004.And over the years articles detailing the claim have been published. Any serious and responsible Board of Directors would have taken corrective action by at least engaging in negotiations.

Let it be noted that had they done that at early stages this matter would have been closed by simply acknowledging that there was some injustice but however they were not aware that such a thing had happened. This would have been a reasonable and acceptable position.

However it appears the current Board and Management want to keep denying clear facts and act as if nothing was amiss. The continual reference to my specification only highlights that the people who grabbed Century/CFX Bank from me and ENG Capital are the same people who abused the law and manipulated the legal system to specify me without a hearing so that I can follow through action to block the sale and transfer of the shares.
The cases of illegal and unjust business seizures have been occurring at an alarming rate in Zimbabwe. This must be firstly documented. Those doing it must be notified and warned. Those aiding ,abetting and facilitating such business seizures must be documented and be made aware records exist of their illegal action.

Employees in affected businesses such as employees at CFX Bank are encouraged and expected to remain professional and do their best to keep the Company vibrant but must avoid being used as proxies in a shareholder fight. This is not wise.

This part of an effort to fully document and seek redress for the fraudulent transfer of 309 million shares which were used to merge Century Bank and CFX Bank. CFX Bank was created as a result of a merger between CFX Bank and Century Bank.

Century Bank was fraudulently merged with CFX Bank through the illegal and irregular transfer of 309,000,000 Century Holdings shares owned by ENG Capital and Companies owned or controlled by ENG Capital. Since this was a fraudulent and illegal transfer of ENG shares the plotters of the scheme renamed the resultant bank CFX Bank dropping the name “Century” in an effort to hide their tracks and attempt to remove any link with Century.

In April 2003 ENG Capital Investments acquired Century Discount Holdings from Century Financial Holdings ( A ZSE listed Financial Holdings Firm).The purchase price was Z$1.5 billion then equivalent to US$ 3 million. The purchase price was paid in full. ENG then applied to the Registrar of Banks and Financial Institutions for the change of controlling shareholder approval which approvals were denied.

After several attempts to get the underlying reasons for the denial I was informed that ? the Authorities? were not comfortable with ENG political inclination which they said remained ?unclear? in addition issue of the ENG Directors age was raised. We then tried to find out if Century Financial Holdings was in a position to refund ENG for the purchase price and to reverse the Century Discount House purchase. Century Holdings was not in a position to refund ENG.

The only recourse was that ENG had to acquire Century Financial Holdings to mitigate any potential loss of outlay on the Century Discount house acquisition. As such ENG and its associated Companies acquired a total of 52% (including the 309 million) of Century Financial Holdings making Century an ENG subsidiary.

Through our Lawyers Ziweni and Company we sought the identity of the buyer and also to clarify that the share sell was null and void as it had all the hall marks of corruption, insider dealing and was being challenged by the beneficial owners of the shares. In addition the shares had been sold through a special bargain and not an open market transparent transaction. The shares were sold for an unrealistic amount of Z$ 3 billion when ENG Capital had acquired the same shares for at least Z$35 billion. This resulted in the prejudice of Z$ 32 billion to ENG Capital Creditors and Contributories/Shareholders. We also asked the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange to investigate and stop the share transfer.

These articles form part of a wider effort to ensure that Zimbabwe?s Corporate sector eventually develops to be one where shareholders are respected and the rule of law is not applied selectively in terms of Investor protection. Whilst the case study may be focused on the 309 million shares and ownership of Century/CFX Bank the facts and scenario can be applied to other businesses that were affected by similar schemes that we devised by corrupt politicians and a corrupt central Bank Governor. It is very important that such cases be clearly and completely be documented.”

End of original article.

When such articles are freely available in the public domain it becomes a puzzling mystery as to why a Senior Lawyer such as Mr Moyo would write an opinion claiming that there was never a challenge to the illegal sale and irregular transfer of the 309 million shares when High Court Case HC-6244-04 is pending before the courts.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 3 of 5

After going through the legal opinion provided by Mr Sternford Moyo to Interfin regarding the disputed takeover over Century/ CFX Bank and its subsequate rebranding into Interfin Banking Corporation it becomes clear that Mr Moyo is a victim of deception and manipulation.

He was deceived into believing that there was never a legal challenge to the fraudulent and illegal transfer of the 309 million Century Shares into CFX Bank then into Interfin Banking Corporation. All records will show this illegal transaction was challenged through various letters and High Court application HC 6244-04 filed at Harare on May 2004.

This challenge was widely reported in the Herald Newspaper, The Independent and the Daily Mirror. Records at the National archives will confirm this .It remains a mystery why Mr Moyo would claim that there was never a challenge when publicly available records confirm the existence of a challenge which is currently before the courts.

“Prima facie, therefore, any disposal by the liquidator which is confirmed by the High Court or the Master of the High Court is a lawful disposal. A party alleging that the liquidation procedures were influenced by an unlawful act or unlawful activities has to make the claim formally in court and establish the basis for any allegation he or she may make.

It has been suggested in another opinion on the matter that Section 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16] divests Muponda of any locus standi. This is not correct. The issue was addressed by the Supreme Court in the case of MUTUMWA DZIVA MAWERE v THE MINISTER OFJUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, S.C. NO. 158 OF 2005. In that matter, an objection to locus standi was raised on the basis that Mutumwa Mawere was a specified person and could not, therefore, institute legal proceedings to challenge his specification or at all without the authority of the investigator. It was common cause that the prohibition was not absolute and could be cured by the authority of the investigator. Likewise, the obstacle faced by the directors of ENG can be cured by the authority of the investigator. ……….”

It is clear from the above that Mr Moyo was misinformed and his opinion was possibly fraudulently obtained. It is noteworthy to find out who misled him and what was the intention and motive for such misinformation. What was being hidden by the false impression that there was never a court case to challenge the transfer of shares? It is clear he gave an opinion which he would not have otherwise given had he been furnished with the full facts especially my founding affidavit for High Court Case HC -6244-04

Mr Moyo continues “……Consequently, Mr Muponda or Mr Watyoka, wherever they may be, can institute legal proceedings notwithstanding the specification. Decisions to the High Court to the contrary made before 11th September 2008 when the Supreme Court made its above finding are applicable only where the specified person proposes to use the resources of his estate in Zimbabwe. An additional basis raised by the Supreme Court is given on page 6 of the judgment where the Supreme Court pointed out that: “In addition, it is a moot issue whether he can be deprived of his constitutional right to challenge an administrative decision such as the above in a court of law to test its correctness. For example if such authority was refused by the investigator the appellant would have a right to appeal if it was unreasonably refused.”

Contrary to the above excerpts the illegal sale of the 309 million shares was challenged through various channels. Letters of complaint were sent to -
(1) the Register of the High court
(2) Liquidator
(3) Zimbabwe Stock Exchange
(4) Fidelity Stock Brokers
(5) Century Holdings Limited
This was followed up by a High Court application HC -6244-04 blocking the sale and or transfer of the 309 million Century/CFX Bank Shares. Its mind boggling that a Bank such as Interfin with the assistance of a lawyer of Mr Moyo’s standing would conduct a due diligence and fail to uncover the existence of such publicly available records which can even be obtained from the National Archives.

This behavior only serves to confirm that Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation have something to hide that’s why they misled a leading lawyer without letting him review details of High Court Case HC-6244-04

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 2 of 5

Respected lawyer Mr Sternford Moyo was duped by Interfin Banking Corporation into issuing a legal opinion which ignored material facts. In his opinion Mr Moyo suggests I never opposed the illegal sale and transfer of Century Bank to CFX Bank and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe.

In May 2004 through MY then lawyers Mr Oscar Ziweni I filed a court motion opposition the sale of Century Bank or any further disposal of ENG Capital shares. Instead of responding through normal court procedure the Authorities responded by specifying me, my lawyer and my Co-Director Nyasha Watyoka.

Clearly this was illegal and unacceptable because a person can not be specified without a hearing offering them a chance to present their side of facts. I was only specified as means to tie my “legal” hands and deny me any legal standing. However the specification does not legitimize the otherwise illegal and fraudulent seizure of Century Bank which was then renamed CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation to hide the illegal and irregular seizure.

I have always maintained my 309 million Century Bank Holdings shares were fraudulently, illegally and irregularly converted into CFX shares (and) then into Interfin Bank Holdings shares. This is why I initiated High Court Case HC-6244-04 to nullify and void any attempts to sanitize this illegal and fraudulent actions.

The various rebranding attempts from Century Bank to CFX Bank to CFX/Interfin Banking Corporation clearly show there is a problem and are evidence of attempts to conceal and deceive on the initial fraudulent transfer of the Century Shares into CFX Bank then Intern Bank.

For that reason we have demanded to know the full identity of the individual or entity who initially “bought” the 309 million shares for which I am demanding US$15,4 million made up of the US$0.05 per share multiplied by 309 million shares.

Our legitimate claim to compensation of US$15,4 million for the 309 million shares is indisputable.

Farai Rwodzi and Interfin’s refusal to pay compensation is groundless and is absolutely not acceptable.Their legal opinion I can only assume was fraudulently obtained without letting Mr Sternford Moyo assess all the effects especially HC – 6244-04

My attorney, the late Mr Oscar Ziweni (RIP), was harassed, intimidated and arrested for defending me and specified for taking my brief and in the end I had no legal representation .At one point he was forced into hiding when threatened with detention on fabricated charges which were just meant to stop him from pushing HC-6244-04

I do not think Mr Sternford Moyo will accept that Lawyer should be specified,detained,arrested and harassed for assisting and defending clients.This behavior of intimidating lawyers is unacceptable anywhere in the world. I am shocked that Mr Moyo who is a former Chairman of the Zimbabwe Law Society does not actually come out to denounce such actions which were carried out by the people who were determined to loot ENG assets including Century Bank.

This is wrong and Mr Moyo with all due respect is being misled and his reputation may be exposed if he writes a Legal Opinion for individuals and entities like Interfin Banking Corporation who do not disclose all material facts.

At that time the tumultuous atmosphere that had gripped the nation and the political interference in the ENG saga, presented a clear and present danger to me and my family which left me with no choice but to leave the country in confidence to clear my name since we had already filed our court case HC 6244-04.