Meikles allegedly firing blacks
Posted by By Our reporter at 5 August, at 19 : 13 PM Print
ZIMBABWE Stock Exchange-listed hospitality and retail company, Meikles Africa Limited is allegedly using racist tactics to fire top black management workers in a move that has raised questions among stakeholders about the group’s commitment to the country’s policies.
It has emerged that the company has since the beginning of this year been firing top black management workers in a move that some observers have described as racial purging. Sources conversant with the day to day running of the group revealed that several top black managers have been fired without genuine reasons.
This is not the first time that the group has been accused of racism after the same allegations were raised after the ousting of a black entrepreneur and banker, Nigel Chanakira from the company through the demerger of Kingdom Financial Holdings from the conglomerate.
Efforts to get in touch with the chairman and majority shareholder for Meikles Africa Limited, John Moxon, such efforts failed as he is reportedly said to be out of the country. But a top official for the group, Balmont declined to respond to the allegations.
Allegations of the firing of top black management workers are coming at a time government is forging ahead with the indigenisation policy to ensure that locals get access to controlling stakes in white-controlled companies.
Labels: JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP, RACISM
Read more...
Govt rules out return of Mawere companies
by Staff reporter
01/06/2010 00:00:00
AN administrator appointed by the government to run some of exiled businessman Mutumwa Mawere’s companies says the tycoon’s de-specification does not mean he will get his companies back.
In a surprise announcement last week co-Home Affairs Ministers Kembo Mohadi and Giles Mutsekwa said the government was lifting the specification of Mawere and two other exiled businessmen, James Makamba and John Moxon.
Mawere immediately welcomed the development but said a return to Zimbabwe depended on whether government was prepared to give him back control of his companies.
But Arafas Gwaradzimba, appointed to run the Shabanie and Mashaba Mines (SMM) after its take-over by government six years ago said Mawere’s de-specification had nothing to do with the ongoing reconstruction of the companies.
"Mr Mawere was de-specified and that has nothing to do with the reconstruction process. "It is the State that has de-specified him and that will not affect my work to reconstruct SMM," Gwaradzimba told the state-owned Herald newspaper.
Mawere was accused of externalising foreign currency and was specified under the Prevention of Corruption Act, in 2004.
He moved to South Africa and government efforts to have him extradited to face the externalisation charges failed.
But the state managed to seize control of his businesses claiming they had failed to pay their debts.
Mawere’s vast business empire included Shabanie and Mashaba asbestos mines , Zimre, CFI Holdings, Turnall, Steelnet, General Beltings, Schweppes Zimbabwe Limited, Fidelity Life Asset Management, and NicozDiamond.
The companies were taken over through a presidential decree.
However SMM’s fortunes have declined under Gwaradzimba’s stewardship and the mines are struggling to pay wages and utility bills while production has also gone south over the years.
Mawere accuses Gwaradzimba of destroying his companies and says there was no justification for the action taken against him.
"I am not bitter but sad that the State's powers can be borrowed for personal gains. It is regrettable that six years of someone's life could be suspended and managed by the State to his detriment.
“It is not just specification because specification on the face of it is harmless but when it is associated with plunder, vulture capitalists in the guise of reconstruction and hypocrisy, it undermines the rule of law," he said.
Labels: JAMES MAKAMBA, JOHN MOXON, MUTUMWA MAWERE
Read more...
KMAL saga: TM cleared
Herald Reporter
Government has revoked the specification of TM Supermarkets, a subsidiary of Kingdom Meikles Africa, while
more evidence of corruption against companies and individuals linked to the major shareholder of the group, Mr John Ralph Moxon, have been unearthed.
Acting Principal Director in the Ministry of Anti-Corruption and Anti-Monopolies Mr Jacob Gonese said in a statement on Thursday that TM Supermarkets’ specification had been revoked on the advice of State-appointed investigators.
However, he added: "Investigators have also unearthed further alleged acts of corruption on the part of the (following) companies and persons: Andrew Lane Mitchell, Kingdom Meikles Limited, Tanganda Tea and Company (Pvt) Ltd, Thomas Meikles Centre (Pvt) Ltd and Murlis Investments (Pvt) Ltd."
Mr Gonese said: "In order to curtail any further prejudice to the taxpayers the last shareholders’ meeting was barred to enable the finalisation of investigations into attempts to sweep an alleged case involving the externalisation of US$22 million by Mr Moxon, under the carpet.
"The co-ministers are naturally unhappy about the gravity of the allegations and have given directives to the investigators to get to the bottom of the case and the investigators are doing their work professionally."
Without spelling out what the new evidence against the group was, Mr Gonese said the specified companies and individuals could present evidence to prove their innocence if they so wished.
Mr Gonese described as "hot air" claims by some sections of the media that co-Ministers of Home Affairs Kembo Mohadi and Giles Mutsekwa were at loggerheads over the specification.
"The hot air surrounding this case does not surprise this office or that of my co-ministers who have co-operated well as politicians.
"In this particular case, like in all others, the co-ministers are behind each other every step of the way. They are guided by sustained consultations and the occasional advice from civil servants and investigators and the team never lost focus and saw issues for what they are.
"The co-ministers have shown the necessary resolve and energy required to handle the task at hand and as their humble servants we are pleased to work with them always."
He said they would leave no stone unturned in unravelling what really happened because of the huge potential prejudice suffered by shareholders and Zimbabwe as a nation.
Mr Gonese said the specification of the companies and individuals was not implemented so that Government could take over the entities concerned, but rather to create conditions for the smooth and legal operation of business.
The act of specification as provided for in the (Anti-Corruption) Act, is not meant as a tool to nationalise thriving business concerns.
"Government is in no way taking over these companies but simply trying to cure them of their mischief.
"In fact, specification does not and should not affect the day-to-day operations of these going concerns but the same provides for a period during which specified companies must account for their alleged corrupt actions to appointed investigators and once stolen or externalised resources are returned, an affected entity will not stay specified for a minute longer."
The then Anti-Corruption and Anti-Monopolies Minister Samuel Undenge specified the companies and persons in January this year.
Labels: CORRUPTION, JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP
Read more...
AAG denies plot to 'molest' Moxon
by Lebo Nkatazo
08/10/2009 00:00:00
SUPA Mandiwanzira, the president of the black empowerment lobby, the Affirmative Action Group (AAG), says he is puzzled by claims made by the Kingdom Meikles Africa Limited (KMAL) chairman John Moxon that he fled Zimbabwe because the AAG wanted to “molest him”.
Moxon left Zimbabwe after he was “specified” under the country’s anti-corruption laws over allegations of “externalising” foreign currency.
Now based in South Africa, Moxon told SW Radio Africa last week that he left Zimbabwe after a friend warned him that he was “about to be molested” after a KMAL extra-ordinary AGM was called to complete a demerger which would see the group breaking ties with Kingdom Bank and depose CEO, Nigel Chanakira.
Moxon, alleging that Chanakira was in a league with the AAG, said: “We were told that Chanakira had motivated three members of the Affirmative Action Group to molest us, molest me, and I will give you their names right now.
“One was Philip Chiyangwa, next was a government minister as he is today, Saviour Kasukuwere, and the third one is Mandi, who is current chairholder for the Affirmative Action Group, Supa Mandiwanzira.”
In a statement issued Wednesday, Mandiwanzira said: “I wish to state categorically that neither the AAG nor myself have at any time since the KMAL saga came to public light - planned to do anything ulterior, let alone ‘molest’ John Moxon.
“The AAG or myself have absolutely no legal nor moral standing to take the law into their hands and harangue another Zimbabwean, more so an investor. The allegations that Moxon makes, admittedly from hearsay, are absolutely untrue as they are unfounded.”
Mandiwanzira said if indeed Moxon left Zimbabwe fearing attacks from the AAG, “he is free to come back into the country”.
He added: “I would also like to advise Moxon and anyone interested, that it has come to the attention of myself and the entire AAG leadership that some vultures circling around KMAL's assets (particularly Moxon's interests) are masquerading as good Samaritans shielding him from the AAG.
“These people, whose names we are withholding at this stage, are feeding Moxon with propaganda so they can instil fear in him to either give up his interests or curry favour with him as his battle with Chanakira intensifies.
“Taking advantage of AAG's old image, they are lying to him that the AAG has ill-intentions against him. I now state here as the AAG president that nothing could be further from the truth. Very soon, we may be forced to expose these individuals by name, to shame them.”
Mandiwanzira said the AAG, which has a history of radical actions to push the black empowerment agenda, “believes very strongly in property rights and does not and will not go around grabbing other people's businesses”.
He added: “Personally, I have no interest in KMAL and have no dog in the boardroom battles happening there. As president of AAG I do, however, call for sanity in the KMAL boardroom and that all matters be resolved amicably and fairly.”
/span>Labels: BEE, JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP
Read more...
Moxon: It's like Nazi Germany
by Violet Gonda
30/09/2009 00:00:00
KINGDOM Meikles Africa Limited Chairman John Moxon was a guest on SW Radio Africa's Hot Seat programme. In the interview with Violet Gonda, he denies charges of "externalising" foreign currency and claims that he fled Zimbabwe for South frica last year after he was warned that KMAL CEO Nigel Chanakira had motivated Affirmative Action Group Chairman Supa Mandiwanzira, Youth Minister Saviour Kasukuwere and businessman Phillip Chiyangwa, to "molest him".
Broadcast: September 25, 2009
VIOLET GONDA: On Hot Seat this week we continue with the saga surrounding the specification of one of the country’s largest companies, Kingdom Meikles Africa Limited. Last week I spoke to co-Home Affairs Minister Giles Mutsekwa who said he authorised the seizure of the company because Chairman John Moxon committed a serious crime by externalising millions of US dollars. On Thursday I spoke to John Moxon himself, who gives us his side of the story. Thursday was also the day that riot police stopped the company’s shareholders from holding their EGM in Harare, where they wanted to remove group CEO Nigel Chanakira. I first asked Moxon to tell us what happened.
JOHN MOXON: They were to meet in terms of the extraordinary general meeting (EGM) which had been called, giving the appropriate notice – which is just short of a month’s notices. And the purpose of the meeting was to remove three directors from the board. Those being Chanakira himself as the Director and Chief Executive; Callistus Jokonya and Busi Bango – all of whom are closely associated with Chanakira. And they were to be removed because the board felt they were obstructing the process of de-merging the bank from the rest of Meikles – that was Kingdom Bank.
The final resolution was to remove those directors from any of the subsidiary boards of the company. That was the purpose of the meeting. It was to start at 10am and the shareholders assembled at the venue for the meeting but they were told when they got there that there is a court order organised by Chanakira and I assume government to postpone the meeting for two weeks. So the meeting was postponed for two weeks. There were present police and other security forces to ensure that shareholders complied with this order. So they all dispersed and that was the end of it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GONDA: Was Mr Chanakira himself present for the EGM?
MOXON: No, Mr Chanakira is in Johannesburg. He is allegedly ill, which is one of the reasons given for the court order. In other words they were suggesting that for compassionate reasons the meeting should be postponed. How ill he is I don’t know but we do know from people who spoke to him, yesterday, that he managed to conduct his business quite satisfactory from wherever he was in hospital. So he can’t be that ill.
GONDA: Oh so he is actually in hospital?
MOXON: He was admitted, we understand, to Milpark Hospital in Johannesburg.
GONDA: Is it known what is wrong with him?
MOXON: We heard on record, which is his own voice, voice clips, that he had flu.
GONDA: I spoke to one of the Home Affairs Ministers Giles Mutsekwa and he accused you of externalising funds. Did you commit a crime? Did you externalise funds?
MOXON: Violet, the comment externalisation conjures up in anyone’s mind illegal transfer of monies or assets from Zimbabwe to another country, and that is why I don’t like the word externalisation. In our case money was invested in South Africa from Zimbabwe with Reserve Bank approval and the funds were remitted by the Reserve Bank to South Africa on our behalf. Those were the days prior to the present Reserve Bank governor’s office. It was when Leonard Tsumba was still governor – in other words it goes back before the current people there.
Now the documentation for all this is available and has been given to the Zimbabwe State President in the last few weeks and it is hoped that he will use his offices to rectify these accusations.
As far as the co-Minister is concerned, his comments or his accusations are defamatory and I have handed that over to my lawyers and I imagine they will be taking action against him. He has said things about me which are untrue and which he has to accept responsibility for. I have been advised, in fact, to sue him by other government Ministers – which is interesting. But I am still going to ask my legal people to advise me on what I should do.
GONDA: When you say you got authorisation years ago, you mentioned that it was during the time that Leonard Tsumba was the Reserve Bank governor, how long ago was that exactly, and is it not the case that a company needs to get authorisation for each and every transaction?
MOXON: Yes but that transaction was done in the early 2000s and our whole process of transactions goes back in fact to 1996 onwards. So we are talking over a very long period of time and a period over which the company developed a very good relationship with the Reserve Bank on these investments. Originally the company did its IPO in 1995, 1996 and at that point in time the foreign investors, who had invested in the company, were encouraged to invest on the basis that the company was to go regional and invest not just in Zimbabwe but in the region. And that was the basis in which we raised substantial sums. In fact it was the largest capital raised that Zimbabwe, up to that point, had ever done. And that whole process was negotiated with the Reserve Bank prior to the IPOs and so we are really going back a process of 15 years now.
GONDA: But when you were given this authorisation were you given a blank cheque, you know cart blanche, or the authorisation was just for one transaction?
MOXON: No it was for different transactions. There was a transaction connected to the Cape Grace Hotel (SA), there was a transaction connected with a company called Rebserve. So there were specific transactions at the time and those still exist. The entire business investments of the Meikle group – whether in Zimbabwe or elsewhere - were all displayed in the annual reports every year for shareholders to read and at the investor presentations which were held twice a year for many years – these were all discussed.
GONDA: So can you describe the nature of the allegations against you then and why you think you are being targeted?
MOXON: I think it all goes back to April last year when it came to my view, my opinion that the relationship between us as a family – or me in particular - and (Nigel) Chanakira was not going to survive. The family had the view that he had his own agenda and his own objectives different from the Meikles ones and we didn’t approve with the manner in which he was trying operate or run that company.
Now, moving forward from April, we got increasingly concerned and in August we tried to remove him by calling an EGM for that purpose but he managed to get that blocked in the courts, as we now have now. At that point in time the family – despite having 43 percent of the shares – were isolated because the board of directors as a whole at that time were not terribly supportive of the family nor were certain shareholders. And they all felt that Nigel Chanakira was doing a satisfactory job.
However, by January and February of this year, the major shareholder – Econet -- and the appointees to the board saw that this was not the case and they have been supportive in trying to remove Chanakira from the board. It’s no longer a battle between Chanakira and Moxon which is portrayed in a lot of the press. It is now a battle between Chanakira, his appointees to the board, his friends outside the company, in political circles, and the company itself and management in the company and the workers in the company.
The opinion in the company and the group is that they do not want Chanakira there and hence this effort at the EGM to have him removed and last week's prevention of the EGM from being held has been a big disappointment to management and to the employees of the company because they are really hoping that this situation can be sorted, that the company can progress, that the company can attract additional investment and become a vital company once more, in the Zimbabwean context.
And I am told, although I am in Johannesburg and not in Harare, I am told that the long faces amongst management after the EGM frustration is very relevant. They are furious, they are angry. They are angry that the EGM was once again frustrated, frustrated by elements in government, by Chanakira himself - whether he is ill or wasn’t ill. And all it has done is stop the company from progressing further and looking after its 4 500 employees for the benefit of one or two individuals - in this case probably one individual.
So Violet the issue is that he must go, he must go. He must go his own way and the company must then rebuild and that is where we are at. The whole board, it was the board who called the EGM, not Moxon, not the Meikles family. We were not part of that. It was the board. So over this last 12 months the entire board has gradually come around the view which Moxon saw last year that this man was the wrong man for that job.
And the EGM we had on June 22 – the purpose of that EGM was to separate the group to dis-invest from the (Kingdom) bank. That the bank - which he considers his - goes its own way and that Meikles go its own way. But there were problems involved with that separation and hence the present problems.
The main problem is that the bank has been advanced monies from Meikles to capitalise it properly – in terms of the Reserve Bank requirements – and those funds have to go back to Meikles. And then the case that the bank is going to struggle to do that. So even the de-merger, the publicised de-merger from June 22nd has not been implemented and that is why we still have these problems today. Shareholders at that time were of the opinion that ‘lets de-merge the bank, that the bank goes its own way and let Chanakira go with it and let Meikles then look after itself.’
GONDA: What were the indicators that showed Mr Chanakira was the wrong man for that job because there are allegations that you are victimising him, or only want to remove him from the company because he disapproved with the way you were running the company and had noticed that you were illegally externalising money?
MOXON: Well Violet I think if you were to have a survey today of management and employees and I think the bank inclusive, you will find that there is no support for him. So it’s not me who is saying now that he has been the wrong man for that job. I am saying that, of course I am saying that but I am one of 4,500 people who are saying that and as far as his accusations are concerned, it started off in this manner:
After the merger at the end of 2007, and I will always remember this, we had a very good management conference. He stood up at the conference and told all the managers present and said ‘one thing I can tell you all is that John Moxon is not a racialist’ and then he presented me with a bible, and I have still got that bible. Now that was a start and it was a good start.
But when this dispute started, the first thing that happened was I was accused of racialism. And he has even conveyed those accusations to the State President, which I object to very much. The next thing is he went to the Reserve Bank and made false accusations of externalisation. The next thing that he did was get the family (Meikles) specified, and he achieved that. Now no one is going to start fighting the family’s battles because the family consists of five people only. So no one is going to fight that battle – one of those people is in a mental home anyway. So what does he know about what goes on in the company and in business in general? He is unable to earn a living for his whole life unfortunately.
So now because an EGM was called to remove this man from office, and that EGM was called by the board of directors and not by Moxon, who is no longer a director - he immediately went to government and got his own company specified. Now that I do know for a fact because management, after it was specified, went to see the MDC Minister of Home Affairs to object to the specification - and I noticed that he is saying they were my emissaries. They were not. They were acting on their own and for the 4,500 people. They were concerned and I can understand that. So they went to the Minister of Home Affairs and complained about the company being specified.
Next thing that happens is the EGM being cancelled by government. And that started earlier in the week when the so-called investigators wrote a letter to the chairman of the company saying that anyone who attended the EGM would be committing a criminal offence. They said any shareholder, any employee, anyone -- and if that is not intimidation what is intimidation?
The day before the EGM, the co-Minister had a meeting with the chairman of the company at which the government, through the co-Minister, said they didn’t want this EGM to take place. So they decided that they would stop it on the basis of compassionate grounds for this so-called sick man - and that is what happened. But the result of blocking of the EGM is not whether it hurts Moxon or Chanakira but it has hurt 4,500 people and that is the issue now. And I think there is going to be a heightening of tension now because the company does not want Chanakira and that is it.
Although, I am getting to be an old man now to appoint, the company in fact wants me back and not him. And that is the message you will get if you were to question people in the company, even if you were to ask the waiters, the waiting staff in La Fontaine. If you go to TM supermarkets, the stores, that is the message you will get from them all.
GONDA: Which Minister ordered the blocking of the EGM?
MOXON: It was the MDC Minister for Home Affairs, Giles Mutsekwa, and he agreed with the Chairman of the company Much Masunda, accompanied by one of the directors of the company called Dennis Stevens; they agreed that on compassionate grounds they would recommend to the shareholders that the meeting would be postponed. Now, when the shareholders as a whole arrived at Meikles Hotel for the meeting and they were denied entry into the meeting place, they were told apparently that a court order had been instituted in the morning with Justice Garwe that the meeting could not take place on compassionate grounds because Chanakira was ill.
Now that was at half past nine; the meeting was supposed to be at 10am and I’m told that they had riot police outside the hotel, they had plain clothes police, there was a real threat there to shareholders who assembled there to do nothing more than to exercise their rights as shareholders to vote.
GONDA: But Mr Moxon, once a company has been specified, is it not a fact that a board, or the company’s board can no longer, or has no legal weight or authority after it has been specified? That under the Anti-corruption Act, once there’s a declaration, the powers of whatever board cease and are then passed onto an administrator?
MOXON: Violet, there are two answers here which I want to make. The first one is, if one was to examine the Act carefully, the board of directors are not restricted from calling an EGM, in fact it is their duty to call an EGM or an AGM, and it’s their duty still to carry out their judiciary duties. In this case, the administrators have adopted powers which are not part of the Act and they are doing this by intimidation of the people in the company.
If you were to speak to some of the management in the company who have close contact with those administrators, it is just like – and I’ll use this expression – it’s just like the Gestapo in Nazi Germany, it is no different. That’s their tactics.
Now the second point I want to make Violet is this, the lawyers, both the company’s lawyers which is Gill, Godlonton & Gerrans, my lawyers which is Sternford Moyo of Scanlen and Holderness have pointed out to government that in fact both the company and the family, the Meikle family, are not in fact legally specified because the specifications were done illegally, they were not done properly and so we are not specified, none of us are specified at law and that the administrators are, as a result of that, unlawfully appointed and it’s a nullity. That is the situation legally but of course in Zimbabwe today, the law - what is the law?
GONDA: It appears from a recent interview you did with Moneyweb recently you only brought in Nigel Chanakira because you wanted him to be a token black face, to be seen as complying with the government’s policy of increased black participation and that you actually never intended to adhere to this policy. Would you agree with that observation?
MOXON: No I don’t agree with that observation Violet. Let me tell you this, in 2007 when the government introduced their indigenisation implications, we as a family decided to embrace that. That was in June, now I know that specifically it was in June 2007, at a dinner in Johannesburg with Nigel Chanakira and his wife. We had dinner and discussed it all and we decided we were going to be proactive. You see, Meikles Africa as it then was, owned at that point in time 34% of Kingdom Financial Holdings. So we knew the people and there are some very good people in Kingdom and we thought we knew Nigel and we agreed to go forward in the proactive sense.
In fact I think with any large business which was viewed as being a white-controlled business, I think we were the only one who proactively progressed along the lines of trying to, not trying, of implementing the indigenisation programme and it was very exciting – we were thrilled with it and this lasted until April 2008. In retrospect I think the job is too big, is just too big for Nigel. That’s the view in Meikles. So it’s not a racial implication at all, it’s just a view on the individual.
GONDA: And you know it’s also believed that Chanakira is a small fish in this whole saga, do you think there is someone or some group or somebody who is bigger or behind Chanakira in this case?
MOXON: Yes, yes.
GONDA: Who?
MOXON: I don’t know who in terms of names but it’s extraordinary, it’s extraordinary how he’s managed to co-opt the State machinery, the State mechanism to assist his position. Now even today, if you have an EGM for the purposes of removing a director, I’ve never heard of a case where that EGM has been postponed because the man in question or lady in question whatever it is, is ill. It’s just extraordinary that the State would step in; the State would step in to deny the shareholders their rights for that reason. It’s just absolutely extraordinary, so where are his influences? I don’t know.
We as a family have always been apolitical; we don’t support the MDC, we don’t support Zanu PF, we have always adopted a completely apolitical approach to business. So we don’t have that sort of clout and I’ve never wanted that sort of clout but he has that sort of clout and I don’t know where it is, I didn’t. It’s basically, it must be Zanu PF I suspect although I don’t know why Minister Giles Mutsekwa has acted as he has – it’s extraordinary to me that. I don’t know.
GONDA: Speaking about the Minister, when I interviewed him last week, he said you sent representatives but you denied this earlier on in the interview, but the minister said you sent in representatives to him and you gave him assurances, through the representatives that you would repay whatever money you externalised. But now you are saying this is a lie, this never happened so what does this really mean? Are you not going to repay the so-called US$21 million that was allegedly externalised?
MOXON: Violet those emissaries, as I think they were described, were not sent to see the Minister by me. They were representing management and the employees of the company, quite rightly to object to the specifications because of its impact on the company and in that context I think they would have told the Minister what they thought. And I don’t know what they told the minister because I’m not privy to that and the Minister at the end or the day after, said he had been misled. He made that comment publicly. These emissaries said that, I understand, that the Minister acted on Chanakira’s advice and he only listened to one side. So they weren’t my emissaries and the Minister has not made any contact with me at all. So that is that situation.
Now as far as the return of funds to Zimbabwe is concerned, those funds were legitimately invested outside Zimbabwe. They were invested with agreements down here in South Africa and so you can’t just suddenly sort of break those agreements and send the money back. But the real issue is this – and this is the important thing – it’s not whether the company should break its agreements with co-investors in South Africa, it’s whether the company should be a responsible citizen, which means that the company will remain a regional operative, a regional investor and attract investment into Zimbabwe, into the company.
Now what hasn’t been given publicity, and I’ll tell you now, is that if this situation is sorted out, the company can expect investment in the company in Zimbabwe of anything up to US$100 million. And that has not been given publicity but that investment is not going to happen, it’s not going to materialise until that company becomes a responsible citizen again. People are very wary about investing, not only in Zimbabwe at the moment, and this is a good example I think, but also in the company unfortunately.
GONDA: But once specified, is it a straightforward task to de-specify the company and also can you translate the loss of business and effects of the specification?
MOXON: Yes, I don’t know legally how easy it is to de-specify, particularly in this case when the lawyers are saying we’re not specified anyway, so I’m not quite sure what the procedure is. All I do say is that it must happen fast because the company is deteriorating rapidly day by day as a result of this. Now where it is deteriorating, it’s deteriorating in its relationship with its bankers, its creditors. The suppliers are worried about it and are not extending normal trading terms to it. We have a relationship in TM Supermarkets with Pick ‘n’ Pay in South Africa and they are very worried about their investment and whether they should be supplying goods and I’m going to see them in fact tomorrow morning to try and discuss that with them.
Now even down to the Cape Grace Hotel with all this going on, it’s in South Africa, it’s in Cape Town and one would think on the surface it’s fairly isolated from what’s going on in Zimbabwe, but one is surprised how all the tour operators who supply the business to the Cape Grace Hotel have all picked up on all this and they’re all contacting the Cape Grace Hotel and saying well should we continue to be putting guests or encouraging guests when they come to Cape Town to go to the Cape Grace. And the Cape Grace management right now having to handle that issue, so it’s doing a lot of damage as we sit here tonight.
GONDA: And in monetary terms?
MOXON: Well let me put it this way, in 2007 at the date of the merger at the end of 2007, the market capitalisation of the group was US$500 million and it was the largest market capitalisation, it was the largest group on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange. Today, it is unlisted, we’ve lost our listing on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange so I wouldn’t like to say what it is worth – probably nothing.
GONDA: Are you a fugitive from justice because I understand that you actually fled the country last year and that’s why you live in South Africa? So what is happening here?
MOXON: I’ve been described as two things, the first thing I am, I’ve been described by the company’s attorneys in South Africa as an oppressor – I’m not quite sure who I’ve oppressed, but I’m an oppressor so I’ve got a new way of life now from what I used to have and now I’m an oppressor.
The second thing is a fugitive from justice, fugitive from justice – what does that mean? If you say will I go back to Harare tomorrow morning, which I’d love to do, the answer is "no I won’t" and I’ll tell you why I left Harare which was exactly a year ago and that was in September. And that was just as the family had called for the first EGM to remove Chanakira.
We had a phone call at home in Harare and we were told by a friend to leave our house because we were about to be molested because we had called this EGM. Now we did leave, we left the house and we went and stayed with a friend and then we started making enquiries with some contacts we had and we were told, yes there is nothing wrong in terms of the police which is the same today incidentally, there are no charges of any nature against us today in legal terms, as we sit here today, but we were told that Nigel Chanakira had motivated three members of what is called the Affirmative Action Group to molest us, molest me and I will give you their names right now. One was Philip Chiyangwa, next was a government minister as he is today Kasukuwere, Saviour …
GONDA: Saviour Kasukuwere?
MOXON: Yes and the third one is Mandi, who is current chairholder for the Affirmative Action Group, Supa Mandizvidza.
GONDA: Supa Mandiwanzira?
MOXON: Yes, he was the other person involved in that effort last year. And the fourth one of course is Chanakira himself. So what we are going to do at the age, I’m now 64, I was a younger man last year, I was only 63, so what are you going to do at that sort of age when you get told that these people are going to try and get you locked up in those sort of prison conditions or whatever it is you’ve got in Harare? You reach an age eventually when you lose resilience to face up to that. If I was thirty years old I would have probably told them well I’m going to stay here and go to hell but not at my age.
GONDA: In terms of the rule of law, what does this Anti-corruption law do, as a person who has been affected by this?
MOXON: Well in the case of my family and I, my entire family, we have left Zimbabwe because we don’t want to be harassed by the investigators appointed by government. These investigators have acquired powers which the law doesn’t allow them to have, but they’ve acquired those powers, all of which is intimidatory and very similar to Nazi Germany to be frank.
The law in terms of this Act, this Act is I think fairly unique in the world, I don’t think they’ve got it elsewhere, it was a most unsatisfactory Act, it does not allow for property rights in the normal sense of the word, it doesn’t allow for the rule of law, but even then, in Zimbabwe these people are interpreting the Act to their own advantage so in effect you are living in a complete and utter Nazi Germany type police state and that’s the implication of it.
GONDA: And a final word?
MOXON: The final word is this, since the company was specified, since it was specified, there’s been a lot of interest in the issue internationally about investing in Zimbabwe and about what happens in Zimbabwe and in addition to that there is a lot of questioning of where the MDC stands because of what Minister Mutsekwa has done in this and I think what he did is probably what’s raised interest in this more than anything else because Zanu PF people, I think the international community might have said, well we’ve heard this before, it’s a bit of déjà vu, we’ve heard the land issue, it’s also déjà vu as they see it.
But now that the MDC have appeared to be complicit in the same activity I think that they have an issue, they have an issue internationally which they have to answer for and how they answer that and how the unity government in turn answers this issue will be very, very critical in terms of foreign investment in that country, which we all need to see because there are so many people which are suffering, the Zimbabweans are suffering.
GONDA: OK, thank you very much Mr John Moxon for talking to us on the programme Hot Seat.
MOXON: OK thank you Violet, thank you very much.
Feedback can be sent to violet@swradioafrica.com
Labels: CORRUPTION, JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP
Read more...
Masunda faces probe for "protecting" Moxon
TH/TZG reporters
Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:53:00 +0000
KINGDOM Meikles Limited chairman and current non-executive Mayor of Harare Mr Muchadeyi Masunda has fallen under the spotlight of KML investigators for allegedly agreeing to demands by specified former chairman John Moxon to alter the company’s financial results in a bid "to clear his name".
Econet Wireless chairman Mr Tawanda Nyambirai has also fallen under the radar of KML investigator, BCA Consulting, for "the dealings" between him and Moxon, now self-exiled in South Africa.
BCA Consulting are the Government-appointed investigators probing allegations of foreign currency externalisation by Moxon. This has resulted in the specification of all KML subsidiaries to allow for the investigations.
BCA alleges Moxon connived with Mr Masunda and other KML directors to alter the financial statements in an attempt to clear Moxon’s name.
The alterations were meant to accommodate changes required by Moxon.
BCA says Econet, which owns 10 percent of KML was in support of this attempt.
KML auditors have reportedly indicated unless there is evidence to justify adjusting the financial statements approved before the demerger, no adjustments were going to be made on the financial statements.
Apparently, two sets of financial results were going to be presented at the company’s next annual general meeting.
The first set being the financials prepared by the auditors with no alterations while the second set would have had changes "to accommodate adjustments required by Mr John Ralph Thomas Moxon".
With Econet owning 10 percent of KML and the Meikles family owning 42 percent, the adjusted financial results would have received a majority endorsement.
"The issue of trying to adjust the financial statements to reflect (Mr) Moxon’s wishes is being probed further," said BCA Consultancy.
"Available evidence point at the fact that you as chairman of KML have agreed to alter the chairman’s statement to incorporate changes requested by Mr John Moxon.
"Please be advised that this matter is being probed further and any changes you make to the chairman’s statement should be adequately supported by evidence warranting such changes."
In the interim, BCA said it would also investigate dealings between Mr Nyambirai and Moxon.
Said BCA: "Evidence available to us suggest that there are a number of transactions between the two which are connected to the investigations."
BCA has since called for the cancellation of the Extra Ordinary General meeting, which had been scheduled for today. The EGM sought for approval to have former KML CEO Mr Nigel Chanakira and directors Mr Callisto Jokonya and Ms Sibusisiwe Bango removed from the board.
Mr Chanakira said he would step down on condition that certain unfulfilled legal and administrative formalities of the demerger between KFHL and Meikles Africa have been completed.
Using power invested in them in terms of Prevention Corruption Act (Chapter 9:16), the investigators said the EGM required their authority.
"For the avoidance of any doubt, you as the chairman of KML has no authority to preside over the EGM, the same applies to the rest of the board members and any members including third parties."
BCA Consulting said their position had been motivated by Moxon’s continued involvement in the affairs of KML which was allegedly prejudicial to the company, particularly minority shareholders.
BCA attributed the board’s decision to withdraw litigation against Moxon for the recovery of US$22 million paid to Coolbay and Mentor Holdings as an example of Moxon’s continued influence at KML.
The investigators further allege that the reconstituted KML board was appointed by Moxon on July 7 2009 at a meeting held at Cape Grace Hotel in Cape Town, South Africa. The meeting was chaired by Moxon.
Most of the decisions were "refereed and decided" by Moxon for implementation without investigators’ approval.
"The evidence available to the investigators clearly shows a lot of bad faith, connivance and outright misrepresentation on the part of some of the board members of KML, and Andy Lane Mitchell, yourself (Masunda) and other third parties," said BCA Consulting.
Labels: JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP, MUCHADEYI MASUNDA
Read more...
Moneyweb and ex-Meikles Chief John Moxon
Interview - Moneyweb and ex-Meikles Chief John Moxon
Tue, 22 Sep 2009 13:06:00 +0000
ALEC HOGG of Moneyweb.co.za spoke with John Moxon, the former chairman of Kingdom Meikles Africa over the details surrounding the specification of that company. John no longer lives in Zimbabwe. He fled the country last year when he was specified.
Full transcript
JOHN MOXON: Yes, we were harassed this time last year, September last year. It was after we tried, as a family, to remove the chief executive, who we thought was pursuing his own agenda and not necessarily the company's agenda. We were hassled, so we left. There's no legal implication against us, it was just hassling. It was rather the same as I suppose in ... land.
ALEC HOGG: People who know Zimbabwe will know that Meikles has been there for many years. You did a merger two years ago with a banking operation called Kingdom, and I guess that's where all the problems start. Why did you merge in the first place?
JOHN MOXON: We were an investor in Kingdom for some years - in fact, we had 34% of Kingdom before the merger. And I think we decided to be proactive with the government's then indigenisation programme. We tried to be proactive. We had been in business with Kingdom, we thought we knew the people - and there are some very good people in Kingdom; you can't generalise. The merger started off very well but then I think certain people had their own agenda, and we tried to oppose that. The next thing that happened of course was the typical thing in the circumstances - you get accused of racialism, next thing making those governments start involving the Reserve Bank and other state enterprises to accuse you of externalising money and things of that nature.
The next step is one gets "specified", which we were on January 16th as a family, which means that you've got no control or say over your own assets. You've got both your hands tied behind your back, with the very wide powers that these investigators or administrators have.
And since then the board of directors also came to the same conclusion that they wanted to remove the chief executive, the same chief executive, they called an AGM for this purpose. In fact, this takes place next week on the 24th. And that's why I think this man used his political connections to specify the company, because he is trying to ensure there isn't an AGM, that he isn't removed, and that he can continue as he has been.
ALEC HOGG: Specifying the company - That's part of the Prevention of Corruption Act. What exactly does it mean?
JOHN MOXON: What it means is that the government can appoint an administrator - in this case he has appointed two administrators, and they have wide powers to ensure that the company operates in a certain manner. So basically you can almost say they are the joint managing directors of the company for all intents and purposes.
ALEC HOGG: So the government has taken over the business, in essence?
JOHN MOXON: Then they'll settle down for a while, get themselves established and then, as it continues without being stopped, they'll start to rape and pillage, I think.
ALEC HOGG: It reminds one of Ayn Rand's book Atlas Shrugged, where she talked about the looters. But on Wednesday this week Robert Mugabe at a mining conference in Harare said Zimbabwe respects property rights and the rule of law. What you are saying is that he doesn't?
JOHN MOXON: I think I'd like to put it this way. There are elements in his party, Zanu PF, who don't. There may or may not be elements in the MDC who don't; there are elements in both parties who do and would like to see the rule of law be established. I think the battle now in our case here is which element is going to win - where will the power be? There's a lot, a lot of international comment on this, which I think will surprise a lot of the politicians up there. It has exposed it. I think specifying a company which employs 4 500, 5 000 people is very different from specifying a family, which consists of four or five people, one of whom is ill, anyway. So they couldn't defend themselves. But 4 500 people perhaps can.
ALEC HOGG: The market capitalisation of Kingdom Meikles, according to Bloomberg, anyway, is US$90m. If the specification continues, if government continues to own the business, presumably the shareholders who own the $90m will be left with nothing?
JOHN MOXON: Yes, in effect. And even now, from a day-to-day point of view, the creditors are jittery, the banks are jittery, customers are jittery. So the winding-down process of the company has begun already, a week later.
ALEC HOGG: John, give us a bit of background on exactly how substantial Meikles is in the Zimbabwean economy.
JOHN MOXON: At the date of the merger, at the end of 2007, our market capitalisation at that time was approximately US$500m, and we were the largest listed company on the stock exchange as a Zimbabwe company - we had a secondary listing in London - not including the Old Mutual, who has a certain number of their shares on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange, for example, because they are a large international company. But as a Zimbabwean company at that point in time we were the largest. Since the "shareholder row" as it's been called - but it's got beyond a shareholder row now - has started, our market cap relative to the other major companies has dropped and we are certainly no longer the largest by any means.
ALEC HOGG: And the secondary listing in London - does that continue?
JOHN MOXON: It does, it does. But at this point in time we've only got about 3% of our total shares on the London Stock Exchange. At our rights year 1996 we were well supported by the international market, where in fact at that time 35% of our total shares were in London. But now it's only 3%.
ALEC HOGG: The signature on the specification, or "to be specified" on Kingdom Meikles, was co-signed by not just Mugabe's man, but by MDC's co-minister of Home Affairs, Giles Mutsekwa. That sounds like this problem goes a lot deeper.
JOHN MOXON: Perhaps it does, although I understand he's been saying he made a mistake, he was misled, so I think he is trying to distance himself from it. But the damage is done. I am not sure at this point in time that one can really say that the MDC as a whole is complicit in the same nature of activity as Zanu PF have been. I think it's too early to say. But it has aroused suspicion that there's a possibility.
ALEC HOGG: John Moxon is the former chairman of Kingdom Meikles. How's that, Wayne? A US$500m company, now worth $90m - if you can sell the shares.
WAYNE McCURRIE: No Alec, it doesn't sound like good news at all, does it?
ALEC HOGG: I would be a little concerned if I was Impala Platinum and other companies that have got investments in Zimbabwe.
WAYNE McCURRIE: I think everyone's concerned about that.
ALEC HOGG: Indeed they should be.
Labels: JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP
Read more...
I made a blunder, says Mutsekwa I made a blunder, says Mutsekwa
September 20, 2009
Broadcast: 18 September 2009: Transcript of SW Radio Africa Hot Seat programme interview
Violet Gonda presents the week’s Hot Seat programme where her guest is co-Home Affairs Minister Giles Mutsekwa who recently authorised the seizure of one of the country’s largest companies, Kingdom Meikles, for allegedly externalising foreign currency.
Mutsekwa admits he made a serious blunder by only listening to CEO Nigel Chanakira, when he co-authorised the specification order. The minister discloses that there are plans to reverse the seizure order, after company Chairman John Moxon agreed to pay back the externalized funds. Mutsekwa also talks about the challenges he is facing to bring back law and order in the country, and the difficulties of working with a ‘police force that is combative and is offended if Zanu-PF is offended.’
Violet Gonda: Using a controversial anti-corruption law a recently published government gazette effectively seized the assets of one of the country’s largest companies, Kingdom Meikles, which is listed on stock exchanges in both Harare and London. The group of companies comprising Kingdom Meikles, Tanganda Tea, Thomas Meikles Centre and Murlis Investments were all listed as ‘specified,’ allowing the government to place them under administration. The Home Affairs Ministers Kembo Mohadi and Giles Mutsekwa authorised the seizure. Mr Mutsekwa is my guest on the programme Hot Seat and I asked him first to explain his thinking in helping the government take over control of the companies.
Giles Mutsekwa: Firstly, let me say Violet that in my opinion it is a very sad development in that I do appreciate the repercussions where this big company, which is on the stock market, is specified. But I think it is also important for our nationals to understand that a serious crime has been committed where extensive sums of money have been externalised from Zimbabwe by the gentleman known as Mr John Moxon. And unfortunately this has been an issue that has been longstanding and was actually under investigation even before I joined the ministry.
However, I want to state, and state emphatically, that it is not the intention of this minister whatsoever to aid and abet ulterior motives of other political parties in what I would have termed a noble cause. I have since had various visits from people concerned who have come to me and who have explained to me the other side of the story. Apparently what has been taking place is that we have been listening to only one person who is an aggrieved character and we took it for granted, being a Christian, everybody thought he was up to his word. But however as I am saying, ever since the gazetting of that instrument the other side has also approached me and we have held various high level meetings and I now understand that it was not all that I was being told by the first side that is correct and I appreciate the issue much better.
Gonda: What do you really appreciate? Who is this person that had given you the one side? You had said he is a Christian, can you explain to our listeners who you are talking about and what does it really say when you make such a huge decision like this based on the reports of just one group and not actually investigating or seeking the response from the other aggrieved side?
Mutsekwa: You see apparently the second person or the second character is not resident in Zimbabwe and it was not easy to make contact with him, therefore it was everybody’s assumption that because he is outside of Zimbabwe it was his intention to stay outside of Zimbabwe and therefore evading these issues that are being investigated. But as to who is this first character I was referring to and I termed him a Christian, I think it is only proper at the moment that we treat names aside but however it is suffice for you to understand that this wrangle is between two major characters and that is John Moxon and Nigel Chanakira. I think I need not be clearer than that. I’m sure that if anybody reads from between the lines they would know whom I’m referring to. But suffice to say those are the major characters at play and as I said it was unfortunate that the other player (Moxon) is stationed outside the country. However what has since happened is that he has sent his emissaries to myself to explain the situation, but most importantly, his willingness to ensure that whatever the country has been deprived of is going to be reimbursed as soon as possible. So I’m happy as the minister that everything is on course and I am advised if people concerned take certain procedures so we rectify the issue.
Gonda: What exactly are you saying? Are you saying now that you have heard from the other player this means that the decision to specify this company may now be reversed?
Mutsekwa: Well I’m saying precisely that, precisely that. And as I said, the happiest news from the second player is that he recognises how serious the issue is. He also recognises that he is indebted to Zimbabwe and during my discussions with his emissaries there was an indication, a genuine indication that whatever Zimbabwe was prejudiced of would be made good.
Gonda: How much money was actually externalised?
Mutsekwa: It was to the tune of US$21 million.
Gonda: Couldn’t you just slap the company with a fine as a confidence building measure because there has been such an outcry about this kind of action and many people feel that this sends the wrong signals to potential investors?
Mutsekwa: Well as I said to you earlier on Violet, I do appreciate, I appreciate the bad impression that will be sent across the whole world about this particular issue. It will never be my intention to discourage potential investors for Zimbabwe and that is why I am in this inclusive government anyway.
Gonda: Who did you consult when you made this decision?
Mutsekwa: Look Violet a ministry is composed of so many people within the bureaucracy but that’s besides the point and various people, who were worth consulting, were consulted before that decision was taken.
Gonda: But your party has issued a statement criticising this move, in fact condemning what they described as a grab of Meikles assets and even your minister in the Economic Planning and Investment Promotion ministry Elton Mangoma said that there was a lack of consultation across the various ministries and he said that the decision to specify the companies was rash and done without consultation making his job difficult and basically he said he was still awaiting a full briefing on the matter before he could issue a substantive comment. What can you say about that?
Mutsekwa: Well look Violet, minister Mangoma runs a ministry just as I run a ministry and there’s definitely no reason why I should make him my reference point. But all I’m saying is, that a decision was taken after several consultations, I appreciate the position if my party is not happy with my decision, I do appreciate that but you must also accept the fact that on a day-to-day issue a minister is appointed to run a ministry and you don’t have to run backwards and forwards consulting your party. But I do appreciate, and as I said earlier on, it is true and I’ve also realised it after consultation that maybe something else could have been done and done smarter and I am saying that I am putting everything in place.
Gonda: Is the reason why you are now entertaining the idea of reversing this drastic decision as a result of the reaction, the negative reaction you have received from your own party because even a statement that was issued by the party said that you have more pressing issues to attend to than seizing the assets of private companies. So were you put under pressure from your party to reverse this decision?
Mutsekwa: Look Violet, my personal, my personal attitude is that if you want to make a good leader you listen to everybody and unless you are capable of listening then you are no different from the dictatorship that Zimbabweans have experienced from Zanu-PF. And all I’m saying is that I have some representations to me, my party included but that is not the only area where these representations came from. What is very important in this particular issue is that the people affected themselves have also realised the gravity of this issue and have said – they put on the table what arrangements they are going to make to ensure that this money is going to be brought back into the fiscus and I’m happy with that. But all I’m saying is pressure must be brought to bear to any leader, and any leader worth his salt is supposed to listen to pressure, that’s what democracy is all about.
Gonda: But Mr Mutsekwa, I come back to the same issue about the comment that was made by one of your colleagues Mr Mangoma that this was a rash decision. The Meikles group of company…
Mutsekwa: I’m not privy to the comment that was made by one of my colleagues.
Gonda: But I’ve just explained it to you that he said that this was a rash decision. Do you not think that thorough investigations should be followed before you make such decisions?
Mutsekwa: Yes but Violet, I think I have said it times without number that necessary investigations and consultations were made and I said to you in the first instance that the only blunder which I think I made was that I did not listen to the second player because he is stationed outside of Zimbabwe. That’s all I’m saying to you.
Gonda: But still, that admission there, didn’t that worry you before you made that decision?
Mutsekwa: No as I said to you Violet, this other person was not in contact with Zimbabwe and therefore had been stationed outside and was not willing at that particular time to be in touch with Zimbabwe, so I’m not so sure what else we could have done. But I think what is most important is that the affected person also realises that he had to exchange notes and he was the first person, after the publication of that instrument, to get in touch with me and I appreciate that now we realise that it is important for people to talk over issues.
Gonda: One of your colleagues, Ghandi Mudzingwa has accused you of failing to address the issues of the rule of law, the issues of unwarranted arrests; doesn’t this worry you that some of your colleagues or some of your own members now see you as someone who is parroting the Zanu-PF line?
Mutsekwa: Firstly let me respond to the first issue about my colleague Ghandi Mudzingwa. You would want to realise that when he made that statement he was in jail, he was under detention. I also want to reveal to you and to the listeners that the same Ghandi Mudzingwa has since apologised for that reckless statement. He has apologised and you can get in touch with him, he has personally apologised to me. So that’s the first issue.
But on the other issue Violet, let me give you a brief history of how this ministry functions. You would appreciate Violet that the ministry of Home Affairs actually was a contentious issue during our discussions before we formed the inclusive government. And you’ll also recall that the Ministry of Home Affairs is completely different from all these other ministries, completely different indeed. Firstly by its nature and by its hugeness;
Secondly that it is a ministry that I actually went into when it had all its complete structures in place – there was a minister already, there was an entire bureaucracy which was in existence. But more to that, is that this entire bureaucracy and the minister survived the 2008 period because they were then deemed to be loyal to Zanu-PF. So I inherited an entire bureaucracy with its minister who is Zanu-PF who could have made choices of whether they want to refer to me any issue for decision making or not because they already have their structures in place. You understand that, Violet?
So for me to be able to operate under such circumstances I had to use lots of tact, and I’m sure I’m best qualified to do that and that is why I got that appointment. But the other issue also is there is no way that you can compare the Ministry of Home Affairs with any other ministry because the difference is – all other MDC ministers assumed ministries which would also have the same bureaucracies but at least there was one person in charge of that ministry. It is not the same. If I had not been very strategic I would not even be able to control and run this ministry by now.
I am also very alive Violet, to the fact that our reason of joining this inclusive government or rather agreeing to be part and parcel of this inclusive government is because we are looking ahead to where Zimbabwe shall have a free and fair election and for that to happen, people who are in sensitive ministries like myself have got to do more than just shouting and talking and I’m doing precisely that.
I have managed to get people in the bureaucracy who were completely wild and un-cooperating now on my side, and I think to me that is a plus. And if we are strategising because we want to go for elections there is more that I’ve got to do as a minister running a security ministry rather than just going on top of the mountain and shout.
Gonda: But still, some would say that these are just words and doesn’t actually reflect what is going on the ground. Since your appointment, what have you done that shows that there have been some changes especially in terms of the rule of law?
Mutsekwa: But Violet I’m telling you and I’ve just said to you that I inherited a structure that was 100 percent Zanu-PF because it was designed to be so before the 2008 elections and I am sure it is very vital that you appreciate that. Now because of that the first thing anybody could have done strategically is to ensure that you convert the thinking and actions of the bureaucracy itself, that’s not easy. You would want to remember that everybody including the entire bureaucracy in that ministry is purely Zanu-PF because that is how it was tailored to be during the 2008 elections. So my first task would be, and that was, to ensure that first and foremost I convert the thinking of the people who operate in the ministry itself. And you want to remember that before I joined the ministry, everybody from the minister whom I found there to the ground floor was all Zanu-PF and the first task naturally is to ensure that you convert the thinking of these people; I have successfully managed to do that.
As to the issue of the rule of law, look Violet, these are the same apparatus I have. We have not recruited anybody new, we have not recruited new policemen, we have not recruited a new police commissioner, we have not recruited any of even the middle rank so I am operating with the same apparatus that were designed to ensure that there is oppression and suppression in Zimbabwe and that has got to be understood.
Gonda: So in terms of disturbances on farms what are you doing about that? Yes granted you are facing major challenges but disturbances are continuing, people are still getting beaten and arrested, farms are still getting burnt. What are you doing as minister?
Mutsekwa: You see the first task and which I think has been successfully completed is to convert the thinking of the police force in this country so that they accept and admit that what they were doing before is wrong. To overcome that hurdle is no mini task. That has been accomplished by myself and I think I’m moving in the correct direction. Thereafter it is easier to give instructions. But as to what specifically we are doing is that we have condemned, I have actually summoned the senior police officers and asked them to reverse whatever is taking place at the moment.
But as I said, you are talking about commanding a police force close to 40 000 people and in six months time Violet nobody can tell me, nobody not even Jesus Christ could tell me that he would have converted the thinking of these people to be thinking the modern way. So we have a police force that is still combative, a police force that is offended if Zanu-PF is offended. We have got that police force still but what we are doing naturally now is to make sure that we recruit and as we are recruiting we are making sure that the police force is diluted and I am very very confident, Violet, that the step that I am taking, come the next elections, then people will know what Mutsekwa’s been doing in this ministry.
Gonda: But Mr Mutsekwa you keep saying that you have converted the thinking of those in the police force and I keep saying that this is not the reality on the ground because even if you look…
Mutsekwa: Now look here, Violet, there are 40 000 policemen in this country…
Gonda: But Mr Mutsekwa can I finish …
Mutsekwa: So I am saying…
Gonda: Mr Mutsekwa, just hold on a minute, just last week the police violently blocked a ZCTU demonstration, where are they getting these instructions? You are supposed to be in a power, sharing government now, and you yourself have said that demonstrations are now allowed in Zimbabwe but they are not allowed in Zimbabwe because the civil society is still not allowed to demonstrate freely in the country. Last week they violently blocked a ZCTU demonstration in Harare.
Mutsekwa: Yah, you see what you need to appreciate Violet is that I am not responsible as minister for the day-to-day operations of the police force. I’m sure it’s paramount for people to appreciate that fact. That is not a ministerial job to do that. The police force in this country and elsewhere have got a constitutional right to design their day-to-day programmes of operations without necessarily referring to the minister. I am there for policy and I have said that demonstrations shall be allowed in Zimbabwe. You are talking about an incident that occurred last week, I picked it up and what I’ve done is I’ve summoned those concerned, I have actually told people who were barred from demonstrating to make another effort and I’ll make sure that demonstration goes through.
Gonda: And what about the issue that journalists are still getting arrested while doing their job?
Mutsekwa: I am not responsible for the day-to-day operations of the police force, besides the constitution of Zimbabwe allows the police commissioner to report to me, to report to the President and also can get instructions from the attorney general, that is the constitutional mandate the police commissioner has been given in Zimbabwe. So it all depends on where that directive is coming from and I wish people could understand the operations of the police force or any other force in the world.
Gonda: Your own party says it wants to see perpetrators of violence brought to book, it wants to see a professional police force that enforces the rule of law without fear or favour and that they want to see a corrupt-free police force which professionally discharges its duties and it says these are the issues that must grab the attention of the (Home Affairs) ministers rather than the unbridled pursuit of private property. What can you say about that?
Mutsekwa: Violet even my own party appreciates that our intentions when we joined this government or rather when we formed this government, our intentions as the Movement for Democratic Change have not been fulfilled because there have been violations to what we see as perfect. So yes I totally agree. It is not my party that is saying that, it is me who is saying that to my party – that I want a professionalised police force, that I want a well paid police force, that I want a police force that is non-partisan, it is me who is saying that and I am striving to get to there. And surely in six months time nobody would have expected that to happen given the financial constraint that we in government got.
Gonda: What have you done as the Home Affairs minister, to ensure that politically motivated criminals have been arrested?
Mutsekwa: There is a lot that is taking place already in the police force. There is completely a lot that you would probably have noticed if you were following events – that since I have joined that ministry there have been public meetings and sessions that are being conducted by the police and they are busy explaining their charter to the people so that the people know what the police force should be doing and what they should not be doing. That is the first thing and to me that is tremendous progress but besides I am also saying that there have been meetings, and high-level meetings with the command element of the police so that they accept this need to change. I am saying and I will say it again that 30 years of oppressive operation cannot be taken out just by six months and people simply have got to understand that. But I am also saying that I lead a security ministry and my plans and tactics are not supposed to be reviewed over the air as we are doing now.
Gonda: But Mr Mutsekwa, my question was what have you done as Home Affairs minister to ensure that the perpetrators of violence have been brought to book? Your own party keeps saying that there’s this selective application of the rule of law and that it’s only MDC people like legislators who keep getting arrested and yet there are scores of Zanu-PF people who have murdered opposition supporters and have never been arrested. What are you doing about this as Home Affairs minister?
Mutsekwa: Violet, I am not the Justice Minister.
Gonda: But you are in control, you are in charge of the police force…
Mutsekwa: All people who have perpetrated violence in Zimbabwe have been accounted for and when I say all, I could be exaggerating but I can tell you, 75 percent of people who perpetrated violence in Zimbabwe have been accounted for and that’s where the police force ends. The rest is with the Justice Ministry. So it is up to them, if they give them bail conditions, it is up to them. But for anybody to say, to ask me a question yekuti (about) – what have you done to ensure that perpetrators of violence are brought to book, I say everything has been done and they have been brought to book.
Gonda: Like who? Can you give an example of some perpetrators of violence, especially from Zanu-PF, who have been brought to book? Is Joseph Mwale, has Joseph Mwale been arrested? I don’t understand when you say that 75 percent of the perpetrators have been brought to book. Can you explain to our listeners what you mean by that?
Mutsekwa: You know Violet that question is very unfair. There are a lot of things that happened in Zimbabwe that are both brutal and unconstitutional and most of those have completely nothing to do with law and order. They are still outstanding and I can give you several examples, the fulfilment of the GPA itself has been a critical issue here in Zimbabwe and to just isolate a police force or a ministry for is completely unfair. There are a lot of things that have not been fulfilled which have got nothing to do with law and order but unfortunately we are saying some of us have got long-term plans of how we must achieve the support and eventually take over the reins of this country. So in short what I’m saying is that people plan differently, there are some who are very good at short sprints, there are some who are long distance runners but I can tell you that it depends on the ministry that you are heading.
And I must say I need to get one cabinet minister from the Movement for Democratic Change who will stand up and say that all his ambitions have been fulfilled since we formed this government and you will find none.
Gonda: Let’s move on to other issues. Private radio stations have been under attack from Zanu-PF and lately from the military, the army commander, Lieutenant General Philip Sibanda recently warned his soldiers to guard against foreign based radio stations who he accuses of being at war with the State. Now as a former military person yourself and since you meet with the Joint Operations Command or JOC, how do you view these threats?
Mutsekwa: Violet, firstly that is not under my ministry but you have raised a very interesting question and its especially where army generals are commenting on political issues. I’m against that. I raised that issue in our weekly meetings in JOC. I am against that, I don’t like the army; I don’t like civil servants participating in political issues. So, yes those statements have been made. They are careless statements, they are unfortunate and they undermine the spirit of the inclusive government.
But let me tell you one thing we have my ministry and the ministry of Information headed by Honourable Shamu and we are making various consultations of what we must do about foreign journalists like yourself because I think our end dream is that everybody must come and operate from within Zimbabwe. And let me tell you one thing we have done a research, and before we did the research everybody used to believe that foreign journalists like yourself and various many others are not operating in Zimbabwe because of my ministry.
It has been established that my ministry has got completely nothing to do with that today and even before. It was the Ministry of Information and we have put that challenge squarely on their shoulders and I’m happy to tell you that we have asked the minister to confirm that something positive is being worked on. We want everybody to operate from this country, we want everybody to come back, and we want everybody to participate in the reconstruction of this country but more so to get alternative voices.
Gonda: We hope to get the Minister of Information Mr Webster Shamu on this programme some time, but before we go, do you have a final word?
Mutsekwa: Thank you, Violet, yes, I have a final word and the final word Violet is, that changing the mindset of the security forces, the police included, in Zimbabwe is a process, it is not an event and therefore it needs a very tactical approach and I’m best trained for that. The other thing is because I am heading a security ministry I shall not be going on top of mountains every day to pronounce each and every step that I am taking. But the most important thing also Violet is that I want to assure Zimbabweans, especially those that have been affected by the gazetting of this specification, that everything possible is being done to ensure that things are normalised and again, that it is not the intention of me as the minister, neither is it the intention of my party, the Movement for Democratic Change to discourage investment in Zimbabwe.
Gonda: So how long is it going to take to finalise this situation – I mean to reverse the seizure order?
Mutsekwa: Well I can tell you as I said before the process is already ongoing, it has started with consultations between those affected and myself and I have advised them of the correct procedures to take and thereafter it depends on the speed that they apply themselves. I think most of it would rather remain between myself and the affected people but I think it is suffice to say that moves are being taken.
Gonda: Right, and finally Mr Mutsekwa how do you respond to people who say that it appears that you may have quietly crossed the floor and become part of Zanu-PF indirectly?
Mutsekwa: Look Violet these things happen once you are in leadership, you are in the spotlight, and democratically I think people are entitled to their own views. But let me assure you one thing, that number one, I am the founder member of the Movement for Democratic Change, number two, I was under incarceration when most people decided that they will run away from this country. I stayed put in this country, went through all trials and tribulations, I was jailed, I was everything, I was tortured. I will be the last person and I will repeat I will be the last person ever to associate myself with Zanu-PF. In fact it is also prudent for me to mention that within the Movement for Democratic Change I am the only senior official who has never been, throughout my entire life, been a member of Zanu-PF, I can’t start now.
Gonda: OK, thank you very much Mr Giles Mutsekwa for talking to us on the programme Hot Seat.
Mutsekwa: It is a pleasure.
Feedback can be sent to violet@swradioafrica.com
Labels: CORRUPTION, JOHN MOXON, MEIKLES GROUP, NEOCOLONIALISM
Read more...
