Eye specialist Guramatunhu battles to recover US$550,000

TOP eye specialist Dr Solomon Guramatunhu has intensified efforts to recover US$550 000 worth of cryptocurrency he lost, after urging the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to appeal against the acquittal of two individuals he accuses of defrauding him.

Dr Guramatunhu has written to the NPA following the acquittal of Lloyd and Melissa Chiyangwa by regional magistrate Marehwanazvo Gofa, who ruled that there was no evidence that cryptocurrency constituted legal tender in Zimbabwe and therefore could not form the basis of a fraud conviction.

Through his lawyer, Admire Rubaya, Guramatunhu argues that the magistrate fundamentally erred in law and misdirected herself by equating the concept of property with legal tender.

"The Regional Magistrates Court grossly erred and grossly misdirected itself in concluding that cryptocurrency tokens were not property capable of being stolen simply because cryptocurrency is not recognised in Zimbabwe as legal tender, as if property needs to be legal tender for it to be adjudged as capable of being stolen," Rubaya wrote.

"Our client is of the firm view that the High Court of Zimbabwe will arrive at a different decision."

Rubaya contends that cryptocurrency constitutes property under the law, falling within the category of incorporeal rights vested in a person and relating to movable property, which can be unlawfully taken.

He further argued that cryptocurrency has tangible monetary value, as it can be converted into ordinary money, including foreign currencies such as United States dollars.

"In this instance, it is our considered view that money cannot be limited only to that which can be termed ‘legal tender' in Zimbabwe," Rubaya said.

"Money includes an entry in an account. There is no indication that the account being referred to in Section 112 of the Criminal Law Codification and Reform Act is only a normal bank account. Cryptocurrency tokens are kept as entries in a cryptocurrency account."

Rubaya urged the NPA to adopt a broader interpretation of the law, stressing that control of a cryptocurrency account equates to control of the digital assets held within it.

"When one has control of the cryptocurrency account, that person has control of the cryptocurrency tokens, which means the owner of the account has an incorporeal right vested in him or her, and that right is capable of being unlawfully and intentionally taken," he argued.

He alleged that the Chiyangwas unlawfully transferred cryptocurrency tokens from Dr Guramatunhu's digital wallets into their own, thereby intentionally and unlawfully assuming title over assets belonging to the complainant.

"The Chiyangwas connived to unlawfully and intentionally assume title in relation to Dr Guramatunhu's incorporeal right to exercise title to the cryptocurrency tokens," Rubaya stated.

In the letter, Guramatunhu's legal team offered to assist the NPA with further research and legal material to support an appeal.

"In light of the arguments raised herein, and with a view to ascertain whether there are prospects of success on appeal against the Chiyangwas' acquittal, we have been instructed to assist you with research and legal material to allow you to appreciate the legal issues raised, so that the Chiyangwas can be held accountable for their alleged criminal misconduct," Rubaya said.

The case is likely to test Zimbabwe's legal interpretation of cryptocurrency and whether digital assets can be treated as property capable of theft under existing criminal law.