Condoms found in car, Chapfika's marriage on the rocks

FORMER Finance Deputy Minister David Chapfika's wife Abina (nee Mutimusakwa) says her estranged husband is a man of violent disposition who uses death threats each time she confronts him over his promiscuity and abusive conduct.

Mrs Chapfika, who has been married to Chapfika for more than 32 years, sensationally revealed this in her divorce papers at the High Court.

She is seeking a decree of divorce citing a plethora of abuses at the hands of the former minister and Zanu-PF Mutoko South MP.

But Chapfika, who has filed his response at the High Court, denies the allegations against him and has implored the court to give the couple a chance to talk over their differences to save their marriage.

Abina also accuses the legislator of abandoning the family to live with a "small house", one Sharon Kunyeda.

In her replication filed in the High Court, Mrs Chapfika says Chapfika's conduct has caused her emotional pain and suffering.

She says the marriage is irretrievably broken down and cannot be salvaged.

She recounts how on several occasions she had confiscated condoms, women's items such as hair bands, brushes as well as jackets from  Chapfika's car.

"This is enough evidence of the defendant's (Chapfika) promiscuous and immoral behaviour," says Mrs Chapfika.

"At one point the plaintiff (Mrs Chapfika) confiscated hotel room keys, in which room the defendant used to hire women for improper occasions and immoral activities."

Mrs Chapfika further alleges that when she told him that she would seek justice on the matter, Chapfika threatened her with bloodshed.

This, she says, prompted her to report the threats to Highlands Police Station.

"The defendant promised the plaintiff "bloodshed" once she went public with this issue of pursuing divorce," she says.

"The defendant continues to threaten and abuse plaintiff by sending her threatening and abusive phone messages, which is also a criminal offence."

She says although the couple used to have their own differences, it did not warrant divorce as she believed that Chapfika would change.

"Thus, the 32 years of marriage is now an accumulation of long periods of abuse at the hands of defendant," she says.

"The plaintiff thought that the defendant, as a leader would lead by example.

"Instead, it is that leading position that has made him feel invincible and above the law.

"The defendant is a violent man who throws tantrums.

"He is on record for public fights, beating up and verbally abusing workers and tearing apart the plaintiff's clothing items."

In December last year, Mrs Chapfika filed for divorce against the legislator on the basis that the couple's union had irretrievably broken down over "small-houses".

She said there were no reasonable prospects of restoring it.

She claimed she was entitled to a 50 percent share of the couple's assets, both movable and immovable, saying she had equally contributed to their acquisition.

But Chapfika dismissed his wife's claims, insisting they were still in love. He said the latter had simply acted on emotions.

He argued that he worked hard for the acquisition of the properties and challenged her to prove her contribution.