Opinion / Columnist
Nearly four years on, still no answers to Douglas Munatsi death
2 hrs ago | Views
IT is now three years and nine months since the tragic and mysterious death of Douglas (Doug) Tawanda Munatsi, yet the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) and the government of Zimbabwe have offered no official explanation.
The silence has fuelled speculation, weakened public trust and cast a long shadow over Zimbabwe's investment climate.
Munatsi, who was the chief executive officer of the Zimbabwe Investment Development Authority (Zida), was not just another business executive.
He was an ex-banker, a largescale farmer, real estate investor and one of the country's most influential figures in the economy.
His sudden death in November 2021 shocked the nation.
His role at the helm of Zida, an institution tasked with driving investment into Zimbabwe, made his passing a matter of national and international concern.
Nearly four years later, Zimbabweans still await answers.
By now, one would have expected law enforcement, led by senior investigators, to have completed a comprehensive inquiry.
Instead, the nation remains in the dark, with rumours replacing facts.
In this age of advanced digital forensics, such silence raises questions about transparency and accountability.
Modern technology has transformed crime investigations.
While it cannot always prevent crime, it greatly improves the likelihood of solving it.
In Munatsi's case, investigators should by now have compiled a strong portfolio of digital evidence, from CCTV surveillance and smartphone data to social media communications.
With these tools, it should be possible to reconstruct his final hours and identify any foul play.
At the time of his death, Munatsi was living in one of Harare's most prestigious apartment complexes, valued at over a million US dollars.
Properties of this calibre typically come with top-tier security measures, including 24-hour guards and CCTV systems recording every entry and exit.
The block was also located directly opposite the President's residence, an area under constant military surveillance.
In such circumstances, it is difficult to understand why the public has received no clarity about what happened.
CCTV footage alone should have provided vital leads, capturing the movement of visitors and staff.
Beyond that, digital forensics such as analysing phone records and geolocation data could have mapped Munatsi's activities and interactions in the hours before his death.
Smart phones often serve as "digital diaries", storing communications, movements and online activity that can be decisive in criminal investigations.
Social media, too, is a rich source of evidence.
Posts, photos and private messages can reveal personal connections or interactions relevant to the case.
Investigators should have carefully reviewed such material, as is standard in high-profile international investigations.
Yet the silence persists.
Even if evidence has been collected, Zimbabwe's legal system faces fresh challenges.
The rise of digital evidence from CCTV to mobile data is reshaping global justice systems.
Zimbabwe's own Data Protection Act governs how such evidence is gathered and secured, but questions remain about its admissibility in court, storage and long-term integrity.
Nonetheless, the central issue here is not legal complexity.
It is accountability.
Three years and nine months on, the absence of a clear update undermines public confidence.
If a figure as prominent as Munatsi can die under unexplained circumstances without closure, what hope is there for ordinary citizens or potential investors seeking assurance in Zimbabwe's justice system?
The death of Munatsi is not simply a private tragedy, it is a national test.
It demands transparency, professionalism and urgency.
Zimbabwe's leaders and its law enforcement agencies owe the nation and the world a full and honest account of what transpired in November 2021.
Until then, both citizens and investors will continue to ask, how could such a high-profile death remain unexplained for so long?
And what does this silence say about the state of justice in Zimbabwe today?
The silence has fuelled speculation, weakened public trust and cast a long shadow over Zimbabwe's investment climate.
Munatsi, who was the chief executive officer of the Zimbabwe Investment Development Authority (Zida), was not just another business executive.
He was an ex-banker, a largescale farmer, real estate investor and one of the country's most influential figures in the economy.
His sudden death in November 2021 shocked the nation.
His role at the helm of Zida, an institution tasked with driving investment into Zimbabwe, made his passing a matter of national and international concern.
Nearly four years later, Zimbabweans still await answers.
By now, one would have expected law enforcement, led by senior investigators, to have completed a comprehensive inquiry.
Instead, the nation remains in the dark, with rumours replacing facts.
In this age of advanced digital forensics, such silence raises questions about transparency and accountability.
Modern technology has transformed crime investigations.
While it cannot always prevent crime, it greatly improves the likelihood of solving it.
In Munatsi's case, investigators should by now have compiled a strong portfolio of digital evidence, from CCTV surveillance and smartphone data to social media communications.
With these tools, it should be possible to reconstruct his final hours and identify any foul play.
At the time of his death, Munatsi was living in one of Harare's most prestigious apartment complexes, valued at over a million US dollars.
Properties of this calibre typically come with top-tier security measures, including 24-hour guards and CCTV systems recording every entry and exit.
The block was also located directly opposite the President's residence, an area under constant military surveillance.
In such circumstances, it is difficult to understand why the public has received no clarity about what happened.
CCTV footage alone should have provided vital leads, capturing the movement of visitors and staff.
Beyond that, digital forensics such as analysing phone records and geolocation data could have mapped Munatsi's activities and interactions in the hours before his death.
Smart phones often serve as "digital diaries", storing communications, movements and online activity that can be decisive in criminal investigations.
Social media, too, is a rich source of evidence.
Posts, photos and private messages can reveal personal connections or interactions relevant to the case.
Investigators should have carefully reviewed such material, as is standard in high-profile international investigations.
Yet the silence persists.
Even if evidence has been collected, Zimbabwe's legal system faces fresh challenges.
The rise of digital evidence from CCTV to mobile data is reshaping global justice systems.
Zimbabwe's own Data Protection Act governs how such evidence is gathered and secured, but questions remain about its admissibility in court, storage and long-term integrity.
Nonetheless, the central issue here is not legal complexity.
It is accountability.
Three years and nine months on, the absence of a clear update undermines public confidence.
If a figure as prominent as Munatsi can die under unexplained circumstances without closure, what hope is there for ordinary citizens or potential investors seeking assurance in Zimbabwe's justice system?
The death of Munatsi is not simply a private tragedy, it is a national test.
It demands transparency, professionalism and urgency.
Zimbabwe's leaders and its law enforcement agencies owe the nation and the world a full and honest account of what transpired in November 2021.
Until then, both citizens and investors will continue to ask, how could such a high-profile death remain unexplained for so long?
And what does this silence say about the state of justice in Zimbabwe today?
Source - Eng. Jacob K Mutisi
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
