Miners demand Telecel stake

Zimbabwe, has rekindled calls for regularisation of the firm’s lopsided foreign shareholding.
Telecel Zimbabwe’s shareholding remains largely skewed in favour of Telecel International, with its 60 percent ownership of the mobile phone company.
NMAZ is the latest among a host of original members to demand a bigger shareholding, in the firm, as structured at its inception.
The company is operating without a licence after the Postal and Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (Potraz) terminated the licence when the company violated conditions set out when the permit was issued.
But an appeal to the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure Development set aside the Potraz order.
This was despite the fact that Telecel International made a commitment at inception that it would regularise the lopsided shareholding within three years. Twelve months down the line TI has not complied with the agreement.
Telecel Zimbabwe managing director Mr Aimable Mpore recently admitted that Potraz cancelled the licence, but said the Ministry of Transport reinstated it.
Nonetheless, the firm violated initial agreements, which stated that Telecel International must hold at least a 40 percent stake of the local firm, under indigenisation laws, which require foreigners to own a maximum 49 percent in local firms.
“We need our shares back,” said NMAZ. “Telecel Zimbabwe’s licence has been cancelled before the expiry date of February 2011.
“The licence belongs to EC and we have the right to do business with MTN or any other international companies – that is the legal point.”
Government recommended the granting of the licence to Telecel in a bid to empower locals and potential beneficiaries, encompassed a broad network of Zimbabweans. But up to now only one person out of the seven groups allegedly benefited from this venture and “that is Mr James Makamba”.
Ironically, Mr Makamba is accused by most members of EC of having unilaterally sold 20 percent of Telecel Zimbabwe shares warehoused at inception, to Telecel International, without the consent of other EC members.
Initially, EC was made up of Kestrel Corporation, Indigenous Business Women Organisation, Selphon Investments, Zimbabwe Liberation War Veterans Association, National Miners Association of Zimbabwe, Integrated Engineering Group, Zimbabwe Farmers Union and Native Investments.
Most of the other founding parties sold their shares, except Kestrel, IBWO, Selphon Investments and NMAZ, which holds the least shares in EC.
But NMAZ has argued that the issue of the lopsided shareholding in Telecel Zimbabwe should be addressed urgently and that efforts be made for the rightful beneficiaries to start benefiting as they have not done so in a long time.
What has also incensed EC shareholders is the fact that Telecel Zimbabwe has never declared a dividend since it was issued with a licence in 1998.
For years it has remained difficult for local shareholders to have a bigger say in the affairs of Telecel since Telecel International still hold management rights.
This has created long-standing, but frosty relations with local shareholders. They have clamouring for TI to reduce its stake as its overwhelming influence has resulted in mostly expatriates holding most senior positions at the firm. The shareholder power heavily skewed in favour of TI also saw the foreign shareholders flexing muscles and ejecting Telecel Zimbabwe acting chairperson Dr Jane Mutasa on fraud allegations.
“If she was mandated by EC shareholders to sit on the board, who has the power to say she must not sit on the board? Even if they did not want her as chairperson, she remains the only legitimate board member from EC.
“When Makamba skipped the right to represent her interest and those of EC automatically fell on her – that is the legal position,” said a source.
Efforts to get a comment from Dr Mutasa were unsuccessful yesterday as her mobile phone went unanswered.