CBZ, ZB off the hook

had instituted investigations into the activities of the financial institutions on sus­picion that they were involved in insider trading.
But SECZ chief executive Mr Tafadzwa Chinamo said investigations established the two only traded dur­ing closed periods.
He said some restricted individuals were trading in the firms’ shares in what, if continued, would lead to insider trade in shares.
Mr Chinamo said SECZ, which regulates capital markets and securities trading in the country, simply gave the two firms warnings.
“We just warned and gave them a final warning. The issue was amicably resolved. It (trading in closed period) was due to lack of knowledge,” he said.
Public- listed companies are restricted at law from doing anything that could have material effect on their share prices during a closed period.
And during a closed period directors of companies, their families and employees who may have certain privileged information about a company are restricted from trading shares of a listed firm.
A closed period is defined as the time from a public listed firm’s year and the date on which the firm in question’s financials are published.
SECZ has over the last few years been tightening the screws on securities trading in the country in efforts to enhance trans­parency.
The regulatory commission is currently in the process of drafting rules that would sup­port the securi­ties legislation provided for by an Act of Parliament.
As SECZ move to plug the loop holes in Zimbabwe’s capital markets, a number of firms on the local bourse have found them­selves on the wrong side of the law, but SECZ has been lenient. Firms that have had a brush with the law, as determined by SECZ, include resource firm RioZim and horticultural entity, Ariston.
Ariston landed i n trouble with the regulator after it was determined that it had not dis­closed sufficient infor­mation needed by investors as it lined up to float a US$8 million rights offers to support operations.
RioZim almost failed to hold an annual general meeting, as it had not disclosed enough background information on the underwriter of its rights issue to raise funds for recapilisation and debt payment.
The two firms eventually complied with directives of the regulatory authorities and managed to proceed with their cash calls.
Further, Gulliver, Interfin and Zeco also recently faced the threat of suspension by SECZ from the Zim­babwe Stock Exchange for late publication of the finan­cial results for the year ended December 31, 2011. The issue was, however, eventually resolved amicably.