Online Reporter
Fidelis Munyoro-Chief Court Reporter
IN a dramatic escalation of their legal battle, jailed business partners Moses Mpofu and Mike Chimombe are taking their fight to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn a High Court decision that denied their applications for leave to appeal against their convictions and sentences.
The duo, accused of masterminding a grand fraudulent scheme that siphoned millions of dollars from public coffers under the guise of the Presidential Goat Pass-On Scheme, now hope to convince the country’s highest court to grant them a lifeline.
At the helm of their defence is Professor Lovemore Madhuku, who outlined the next steps in their legal strategy.
“The law is very clear,” he said.
“If leave to appeal is denied at the High Court, we have the right to approach a judge of the Supreme Court with a similar application. That judge will then determine whether or not leave to appeal should be granted.”
Prof Madhuku said the legal framework granted the High Court the initial opportunity to assess such applications, given its familiarity with the case. However, he emphasised that this did not mark the end of the road for the accused.
“It is the first chance, but not the final one,” he said.
“While we respect the High Court’s view that our clients have no prospects of success on appeal, we fundamentally disagree with it. A formal application will be lodged with the Supreme Court shortly.”
Under Zimbabwe’s judicial procedures, such applications are considered chamber matters, typically decided by a single Supreme Court judge based on written submissions. Personal appearances by lawyers or applicants are rare, but can be permitted at the judge’s discretion.
For an appeal to proceed, the application must convincingly demonstrate that the case has “reasonable prospects of success.” This critical threshold ensures that only substantial cases reach the apex court for further scrutiny.
Justice Pisirayi Kwenda, who presided over the High Court proceedings described their arguments as “frivolous and vexatious.” The judge laid bare the fraudulent scheme at the heart of the case, exposing a trail of deceit that led to millions of dollars being siphoned from public funds.
Central to the scheme was the fictitious entity, Blackdeck Livestock and Poultry Farming, which Mpofu and Chimombe falsely presented as a legitimate company. Armed with counterfeit tax and compliance certificates, the pair duped the Government into awarding them a lucrative contract worth over $87 million to supply goats.
Justice Kwenda noted that the fraudulent bid bypassed multiple Government verification processes, thanks to deliberate misrepresentations by the accused.
“The applicants were fully aware that Blackdeck Livestock and Poultry Farming was not a registered company and lacked the capacity to act,” the judge stated.
Court proceedings revealed that $7.7 million (local currency) of public funds was funnelled into the bank account of Blackdeck (Pvt) Ltd, a company unrelated to the fictitious entity. From there, the money was swiftly transferred to other companies controlled by the accused and traded on the black market.
Justice Kwenda noted with concern that none of the funds were accounted for and only a paltry fraction of the promised goats was supplied.
“The goats delivered were valued at a mere $331 445, leaving a glaring shortfall,” the judge said.
In his ruling, Justice Kwenda dismissed Mpofu’s claims of ignorance regarding the scheme, highlighting his active participation in its orchestration.
“He attended meetings, signed the contract, and provided the bank account used to receive the funds. His role in the scheme was undeniable,” the judge remarked.
Chimombe, who also serves as a director of Millytake Enterprises, was found to have played an equally pivotal role in the fraud. His company received $200 million Zimbabwean dollars from the illicit proceeds, further implicating him in the scandal.
Justice Kwenda did not mince his words when condemning the conduct of the accused and their legal team. He criticised their counsel for recycling “baseless arguments” that lacked any factual foundation.
“A company exists only in the eyes of the law after the formalities of incorporation are completed. Insisting that a fictitious entity had legal standing is an abuse of the court process,” he said.
The judge went further, denouncing the accused and their lawyers for advancing arguments he described as “dishonourable” and causing unnecessary annoyance to the court. Regarding the sentences handed down, Justice Kwenda stood firm, reinforcing the trial court’s decision to impose custodial terms.
“The fraud involved public funds and was committed in aggravating circumstances,” he said. “The sentencing guidelines under Zimbabwean law prescribe harsher penalties for cases involving significant public funds, breaches of trust, and unrecovered proceeds.”
Justice Kwenda underscored the gravity of the offence, affirming that the presumptive 20-year sentence imposed on the accused was justified.
“If the court erred at all, it erred on the side of leniency,” he said. Efforts by Mpofu and Chimombe to argue that their sentences were excessive were swiftly dismissed, with the judge pointing out that the penalties were neither disproportionate nor inappropriate.
