High Court slams RBZ Governor

The High Court has strongly criticised the conduct of Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) Governor John Mushayavanhu and his legal team, describing their handling of court papers as "untenable," "highly misleading," and procedurally defective in a judgment that set aside the central bank's decision to freeze millions of dollars linked to a gold trade arrangement.

The ruling was made by Justice Jacob Mafusire following an urgent application brought by Al Shams Global Ltd against the RBZ, Fidelity Gold Refinery and GetBucks Microfinance Bank over the freezing of a bank account holding US$7 million.

The court found that the RBZ Governor purported to swear an affidavit in Harare while he was in Washington, United States, with no proper explanation provided to justify the discrepancy.

"I could not quite understand the position of the first respondent and its legal practitioners," the judge said, noting that there was no sworn evidence from the Governor or a commissioner of oaths clarifying the circumstances of the document's signing.

Justice Mafusire was also critical of the central bank's legal submissions, describing them as irregular and confusing. "The document containing the argument defies description. It is neither a sworn statement nor heads of argument, but purports to be both," he said.

The court further ruled that the affidavit falsely indicated it had been signed in Harare in the presence of a commissioner of oaths, describing this as "highly misleading."

As a result, the judge struck the RBZ's notice of opposition and opposing affidavit from the record, effectively leaving the central bank without a valid defence in the matter.

At the centre of the dispute was a US$7 million deposit linked to a broader US$12.1 million inflow used for gold purchases. The funds were frozen in July 2025 after the RBZ demanded proof of source of funds, despite earlier acknowledging that the money originated from Dubai.

The court found that the central bank acted unlawfully and in violation of the Administrative Justice Act by failing to provide notice, reasons, or a hearing before freezing the account. It also ruled that the RBZ's actions were irrational given its long-standing financial dealings with Al Shams, which included repayment arrangements exceeding US$53 million.

Justice Mafusire concluded that the RBZ had exceeded its authority under anti-money laundering laws and encroached on the mandate of the Financial Intelligence Unit.

He ultimately set aside the central bank's decision to suspend the account and ordered costs against the RBZ, while noting that the dispute could likely have been resolved without litigation, attributing it in part to strained relations between the parties.