Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital - Part 5 of 5
by Gilbert Muponda on Thursday, October 14, 2010 at 10:03pm
Interfin Bank Directors seem to be ill advised and practizing massive self-deception on a grand scale. It is well documented and in public domain that I challenged the illegal sale and or transfer of Century bank through High Court case HC-6244-04.Yet they go ahead and somehow convince a Lawyer of Mr Sternford Moyo's standing to issue a legal opinion that has an effect of breaking the ZSE Act and mislead the investing public. This is a serious offence under the ZSE Act, Company Act and other Zimbabwean laws that govern director fiduciary duties.
These Directors need to know that in their personal capacity they could be fired, tried and convicted for lying to minority shareholders and the Investing public...their employer.
Everyone wants the money, but it pretty much amounts to selling your soul when supposedly respected members of the comm7unity such as Bank directors willingly mislead the regulatory bodies such as The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Stock Exchange ,Ministry of Finance, Securities Commission etc.
The ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE ACTActs 27/1973, 24/1975, 15/1981, 20/1984; R.G.Ns 54/1975; 1135/1975, S.Is 468/1979, 236/1980. Is clear on this. Below is an extract from the ZSE act which Interfin Banking Corporation Directors ought to be familiar with since they run a Company governed by this act.
"73 Prohibition of fraudulent acts or of carrying on business of stock exchange
(1) No person shall--
(a) make or cause or permit to be made in any document or return which
is required by or under this Act to be sent to the Secretary, the Minister, the Registrar,
the Committee, the Exchange auditor or an auditor referred to in paragraph (d) of
section forty-six a statement which he knows to be false or does not know or believe
to be true; or
(b) by addition, alteration, erasure or omission falsify any document or
return referred to in paragraph (a); or
(c) by any statement, promise or forecast which he knows to be false or
does not know or believe to be true induce any other person to purchase or sell any
securities; or
(d) directly or indirectly use or take part in any manipulative or deceptive
method of dealing in listed securities likely to stimulate further dealings in listed
securities or any class or classes thereof on the Exchange; or
(e) by means of fictitious transactions or the spreading of false reports
influence the prices of listed securities or any class or classes thereof on the
Exchange."
Practizing self deception at an alarming scale when they willingly break the relevant Governing Act .This act is freely available on the internet and Interfin Bank Directors need to familiarize themselves .The direct link is here http://www.parlzim.gov.zw/cms/Acts/Title24_COMMERCIAL_AND_FINANCIAL_INSTITUTIONS/ZIMBABWE_STOCK_EXCHANGE_ACT_24_18.pdf
Interfin Banking Corporation Directors seem to be practizing moral flexibility whilst bending rules and regulations to conceal their prior knowledge of a legitimate claim which they with held informing their employers who are the Investing public who are protected by the ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE ACT Acts 27/1973, 24/1975, 15/1981, 20/1984; R.G.Ns 54/1975; 1135/1975, S.Is 468/1979, 236/1980.
High Court Case HC-6244-04 was filed in 2004 and its still pending before the courts. Yet Interfin Banking Corporation Directors pretend there was never any challenge to their illegal and irregular grabbing of Century/CFX Bank.
By will fully and deliberately misleading the Investing Public in violation of the ZSE Act Interfin Banking Corporation is an organization that has re-defined the definition of corruption , deceit and concealment of material information from Investing public and Regulatory Authorities.
Notice to Interfin Bank Directors
by Gilbert Muponda on Thursday, October 14, 2010 at 5:36am
It has come to my attention that Interfin Bank Directors are continuing to tarnish my reputation and mislead Investing Public and Regulatory Authorities by alleging that I never legally challenged the illegal transfer of 309 million Century/CFX shares despite their full knowledge of HC-6244-04.I humbly request that they correct this within the next 96 hrs ,failure to which I will have no choice but to do it for them.
Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital - Part 4 of 5
by Gilbert Muponda on Wednesday, October 13, 2010 at 9:20am
Mr Sternford Moyo's claim that there was never an objection to the sale and or transfer of the Century Shares into CFX Bank shares then Interfin Bank shares can not go unchallenged .His opinion must be put under an intregrity test and be compared to publicly available information.
In my original article titled "Gilbert Muponda: Further Revelations on the Century/CFX bank Fraud"
Published more than a year ago on Sep 28th, 2009 and filed under Financial News, which appeared in many newspapers including The Zimbabwe Metro Newspaper I made it clear there was already a High Court case blocking the illegal sale and transfer of the 309 Million Century Shares. The relevant link is here http://www.zimbabwemetro.com/finance/gilbert-muponda-further-revelations-on-the-centurycfx-bank-fraud/
Therefore anyone who did a serious due diligence would have discovered that the dealing in such shares was null and void in addition to being illegal and fraudulent as it was misleading the investing public.
Below is the full article wherein I made it clear High Court Case HC 6244-04 had been set in motion and therefore any dealing in the said 309 million Century shares and any attempt to conceal the original fraudulent transfer will constitute further unacceptable fraudulent behavior and decepit meant to mislead regulatory Authorities and the General Investing public
The original article -
"It appears there is a misunderstanding on why I have been publishing letters relating to claim for ownership of 309 million Century/CFX Bank shares. In addition some have asked why the matter is being raised 5 years after the 309 Million shares were irregularly sold and transferred.
When the sale was done on or around 12 May 2004 I through my lawyers Ziweni and Company filed a high court application to block the sale of the shares. This record should still be there at the HarareHigh Court. As soon as we filed this application I was then specified without a hearing. This limited my ability to follow up the application. My lawyer and his firm was also specified. Leaving me without legal representation on the matter.
This was all done to ensure that the 309 million shares are sold, transferred and Century/CFX Bank is snatched from my Company - ENG Capital.
Several articles have been written highlighting how these 309 million shares and Century/CFX bank was grabbed from ENG Capital. Over the time we had hoped the current and previous Directors and Management of CFX Bank would reach out and try to find out what really transpired and resolve our claim. This is the normal way of doing business.
If you hear someone claiming ownership of your Bank or business you are expected to confront or engage that person to verify the nature of their claim. The CFX Bank Board, Management and shareholders somehow made the arrogant decision to behave as if everything is normal and totally disregard a claim which has been documented even at High court since day one of the fraudulent merger between Century and CFX Bank.
Even the latest press comments by the Bank through an individual identified as its Lawyer it appears they want to keep hiding behind technicalities such as you should have raised the claim earlier or you are specified therefore you cant act on your own behalf. This is inaccurate and misleading.
This level of arrogance and total disregard of material facts and potential impact on investors is an attitude which must be challenged and stopped. As out lined above this matter was filed at the high court in May 2004.And over the years articles detailing the claim have been published. Any serious and responsible Board of Directors would have taken corrective action by at least engaging in negotiations.
Let it be noted that had they done that at early stages this matter would have been closed by simply acknowledging that there was some injustice but however they were not aware that such a thing had happened. This would have been a reasonable and acceptable position.
However it appears the current Board and Management want to keep denying clear facts and act as if nothing was amiss. The continual reference to my specification only highlights that the people who grabbed Century/CFX Bank from me and ENG Capital are the same people who abused the law and manipulated the legal system to specify me without a hearing so that I can follow through action to block the sale and transfer of the shares.
The cases of illegal and unjust business seizures have been occurring at an alarming rate in Zimbabwe. This must be firstly documented. Those doing it must be notified and warned. Those aiding ,abetting and facilitating such business seizures must be documented and be made aware records exist of their illegal action.
Employees in affected businesses such as employees at CFX Bank are encouraged and expected to remain professional and do their best to keep the Company vibrant but must avoid being used as proxies in a shareholder fight. This is not wise.
This part of an effort to fully document and seek redress for the fraudulent transfer of 309 million shares which were used to merge Century Bank and CFX Bank. CFX Bank was created as a result of a merger between CFX Bank and Century Bank.
Century Bank was fraudulently merged with CFX Bank through the illegal and irregular transfer of 309,000,000 Century Holdings shares owned by ENG Capital and Companies owned or controlled by ENG Capital. Since this was a fraudulent and illegal transfer of ENG shares the plotters of the scheme renamed the resultant bank CFX Bank dropping the name "Century" in an effort to hide their tracks and attempt to remove any link with Century.
In April 2003 ENG Capital Investments acquired Century Discount Holdings from Century Financial Holdings ( A ZSE listed Financial Holdings Firm).The purchase price was Z$1.5 billion then equivalent to US$ 3 million. The purchase price was paid in full. ENG then applied to the Registrar of Banks and Financial Institutions for the change of controlling shareholder approval which approvals were denied.
After several attempts to get the underlying reasons for the denial I was informed that ? the Authorities? were not comfortable with ENG political inclination which they said remained ?unclear? in addition issue of the ENG Directors age was raised. We then tried to find out if Century Financial Holdings was in a position to refund ENG for the purchase price and to reverse the Century Discount House purchase. Century Holdings was not in a position to refund ENG.
The only recourse was that ENG had to acquire Century Financial Holdings to mitigate any potential loss of outlay on the Century Discount house acquisition. As such ENG and its associated Companies acquired a total of 52% (including the 309 million) of Century Financial Holdings making Century an ENG subsidiary.
Through our Lawyers Ziweni and Company we sought the identity of the buyer and also to clarify that the share sell was null and void as it had all the hall marks of corruption, insider dealing and was being challenged by the beneficial owners of the shares. In addition the shares had been sold through a special bargain and not an open market transparent transaction. The shares were sold for an unrealistic amount of Z$ 3 billion when ENG Capital had acquired the same shares for at least Z$35 billion. This resulted in the prejudice of Z$ 32 billion to ENG Capital Creditors and Contributories/Shareholders. We also asked the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange to investigate and stop the share transfer.
These articles form part of a wider effort to ensure that Zimbabwe?s Corporate sector eventually develops to be one where shareholders are respected and the rule of law is not applied selectively in terms of Investor protection. Whilst the case study may be focused on the 309 million shares and ownership of Century/CFX Bank the facts and scenario can be applied to other businesses that were affected by similar schemes that we devised by corrupt politicians and a corrupt central Bank Governor. It is very important that such cases be clearly and completely be documented."
End of original article.
When such articles are freely available in the public domain it becomes a puzzling mystery as to why a Senior Lawyer such as Mr Moyo would write an opinion claiming that there was never a challenge to the illegal sale and irregular transfer of the 309 million shares when High Court Case HC-6244-04 is pending before the courts.
Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital - Part 3 of 5
by Gilbert Muponda on Tuesday, October 12, 2010 at 9:15pm
After going through the legal opinion provided by Mr Sternford Moyo to Interfin regarding the disputed takeover over Century/ CFX Bank and its subsequate rebranding into Interfin Banking Corporation it becomes clear that Mr Moyo is a victim of deception and manipulation.
He was deceived into believing that there was never a legal challenge to the fraudulent and illegal transfer of the 309 million Century Shares into CFX Bank then into Interfin Banking Corporation. All records will show this illegal transaction was challenged through various letters and High Court application HC 6244-04 filed at Harare on May 2004.
This challenge was widely reported in the Herald Newspaper, The Independent and the Daily Mirror. Records at the National archives will confirm this .It remains a mystery why Mr Moyo would claim that there was never a challenge when publicly available records confirm the existence of a challenge which is currently before the courts.
"Prima facie, therefore, any disposal by the liquidator which is confirmed by the High Court or the Master of the High Court is a lawful disposal. A party alleging that the liquidation procedures were influenced by an unlawful act or unlawful activities has to make the claim formally in court and establish the basis for any allegation he or she may make.
It has been suggested in another opinion on the matter that Section 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16] divests Muponda of any locus standi. This is not correct. The issue was addressed by the Supreme Court in the case of MUTUMWA DZIVA MAWERE v THE MINISTER OFJUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, S.C. NO. 158 OF 2005. In that matter, an objection to locus standi was raised on the basis that Mutumwa Mawere was a specified person and could not, therefore, institute legal proceedings to challenge his specification or at all without the authority of the investigator. It was common cause that the prohibition was not absolute and could be cured by the authority of the investigator. Likewise, the obstacle faced by the directors of ENG can be cured by the authority of the investigator. ………."
It is clear from the above that Mr Moyo was misinformed and his opinion was possibly fraudulently obtained. It is noteworthy to find out who misled him and what was the intention and motive for such misinformation. What was being hidden by the false impression that there was never a court case to challenge the transfer of shares? It is clear he gave an opinion which he would not have otherwise given had he been furnished with the full facts especially my founding affidavit for High Court Case HC -6244-04
Mr Moyo continues "……Consequently, Mr Muponda or Mr Watyoka, wherever they may be, can institute legal proceedings notwithstanding the specification. Decisions to the High Court to the contrary made before 11th September 2008 when the Supreme Court made its above finding are applicable only where the specified person proposes to use the resources of his estate in Zimbabwe. An additional basis raised by the Supreme Court is given on page 6 of the judgment where the Supreme Court pointed out that: "In addition, it is a moot issue whether he can be deprived of his constitutional right to challenge an administrative decision such as the above in a court of law to test its correctness. For example if such authority was refused by the investigator the appellant would have a right to appeal if it was unreasonably refused."
Contrary to the above excerpts the illegal sale of the 309 million shares was challenged through various channels. Letters of complaint were sent to -
(1) the Register of the High court
(2) Liquidator
(3) Zimbabwe Stock Exchange
(4) Fidelity Stock Brokers
(5) Century Holdings Limited
This was followed up by a High Court application HC -6244-04 blocking the sale and or transfer of the 309 million Century/CFX Bank Shares. Its mind boggling that a Bank such as Interfin with the assistance of a lawyer of Mr Moyo's standing would conduct a due diligence and fail to uncover the existence of such publicly available records which can even be obtained from the National Archives.
This behavior only serves to confirm that Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation have something to hide that's why they misled a leading lawyer without letting him review details of High Court Case HC-6244-04
Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital - Part 2 of 5
by Gilbert Muponda on Monday, October 11, 2010 at 6:51pm
Respected lawyer Mr Sternford Moyo was duped by Interfin Banking Corporation into issuing a legal opinion which ignored material facts. In his opinion Mr Moyo suggests I never opposed the illegal sale and transfer of Century Bank to CFX Bank and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe.
In May 2004 through my then lawyers Mr Oscar Ziweni I filed a court motion opposition the sale of Century Bank or any further disposal of ENG Capital shares. Instead of responding through normal court procedure the Authorities responded by specifying me, my lawyer and my Co-Director Nyasha Watyoka.
Clearly this was illegal and unacceptable because a person can not be specified without a hearing offering them a chance to present their side of facts. I was only specified as means to tie my "legal" hands and deny me any legal standing. However the specification does not legitimize the otherwise illegal and fraudulent seizure of Century Bank which was then renamed CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation to hide the illegal and irregular seizure.
I have always maintained my 309 million Century Bank Holdings shares were fraudulently, illegally and irregularly converted into CFX shares (and) then into Interfin Bank Holdings shares. This is why I initiated High Court Case HC-6244-04 to nullify and void any attempts to sanitize this illegal and fraudulent actions.
The various rebranding attempts from Century Bank to CFX Bank to CFX/Interfin Banking Corporation clearly show there is a problem and are evidence of attempts to conceal and deceive on the initial fraudulent transfer of the Century Shares into CFX Bank then Intern Bank.
For that reason we have demanded to know the full identity of the individual or entity who initially "bought" the 309 million shares for which I am demanding US$15,4 million made up of the US$0.05 per share multiplied by 309 million shares.Our legitimate claim to compensation of US$15,4 million for the 309 million shares is indisputable.
Farai Rwodzi and Interfin's refusal to pay compensation is groundless and is absolutely not acceptable.Their legal opinion I can only assume was fraudulently obtained without letting Mr Sternford Moyo assess all the effects especially HC - 6244-04
My attorney, the late Mr Oscar Ziweni (RIP), was harassed, intimidated and arrested for defending me and specified for taking my brief and in the end I had no legal representation .At one point he was forced into hiding when threatened with detention on fabricated charges which were just meant to stop him from pushing HC-6244-04
I do not think Mr Sternford Moyo will accept that Lawyer should be specified,detained,arrested and harassed for assisting and defending clients.This behavior of intimidating lawyers is unacceptable anywhere in the world. I am shocked that Mr Moyo who is a former Chairman of the Zimbabwe Law Society does not actually come out to denounce such actions which were carried out by the people who were determined to loot ENG assets including Century Bank.
This is wrong and Mr Moyo with all due respect is being misled and his reputation may be exposed if he writes a Legal Opinion for individuals and entities like Interfin Banking Corporation who do not disclose all material facts.
At that time the tumultuous atmosphere that had gripped the nation and the political interference in the ENG saga, presented a clear and present danger to me and my family which left me with no choice but to leave the country in confidence to clear my name since we had already filed our court case HC 6244-04.
Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital c - Part 1 of 5
Mr Sternford Moyo states "The liquidation proceedings were not at any time challenged. No attempt appears to have been made to obtain an order setting aside the proceedings. Indeed, to date, no proceedings have been instituted to set aside the liquidation proceedings. The companies were duly wound up in terms of the procedure provided for in the Companies Act and a distribution to creditors was duly effected. There was no objection to the distribution." This is according to his opinion published by NEHANDARADIO.COM found here -
http://nehandaradio.com/2010/10/06/legal-opinion-on-eng-vs-interfin-looting-saga/comment-page-1/#comment-15116
This opinion is flawed because it based on the fallicious assumption that I never challenged the liquidation or sale and or transfer of the 309 million Century/CFX shares. The truth is I challenged the whole process including the sale and transfer of the 309 million shares. My founding affidavit for the High Court Case HC-6244-04 is found here http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2059705&id=1393181020
My then business partner and co-director Nyasha Watyoka supported my court action under High Court Case HC 6244-04 .In fact he did his own affidavit to support my court motion. His affidavit can be found here http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2059734&id=1393181020&l=3ea08676ec .This clearly show that there was no serious due diligence exercise done by Interfin Banking Corporation but instead they sort to manipulate a senior lawyer by giving him incomplete at times false information to induce him to author an opinion that would endorse their illegal take over of Century/CFX Bank.
It is important in commercial transactions to obtain a legal opinion. Normally this should come from an independent and senior respected lawyer. Under normal circumstances Mr Moyo would qualify as a senior and independent lawyer .However in this case he can not be independent since he reportedly represented Mr John Moxon and Meikles Africa Limited and Mr Farai Rwodzi of Interfin Banking Corporation is also Chairman of the same Meikles Africa Limited which Mr Moyo has represented. Therefore Mr Moyo's opinion cant be viewed as independent or unbiased .He is an interested party and as such he should have recused himself,Which led him to give an opinion which totally ignores HC 6244-04 which he goes on to deny its existence despite overwhelming evidence of its existence,effect and impact
In law, an opinion (also consilia) is usually a written explanation by a judge or group of judges that accompanies an order or ruling in a case, laying out the rationale and legal principles for the ruling.
According to Wikipedia - "In the United Kingdom and other common law countries, a legal opinion also refers to written legal advice on a point of law issued by either a barrister (often referred to as "counsel's opinion") or occasionally a senior government law officer, such as an attorney general.
The latter form of opinion is sometimes made available to the public either because of public pressure (see for example Lord Goldsmith's opinion on the Iraq War, Yoo memo), or because a general clarification of the law is called for (see for example, the Yorke-Talbot slavery opinion)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_opinion
In the court application for release of ENG Capital cars my Co-Director Nyasha Watyoka is merely salvaging what we can easily salvage .However this shouldn't be mistaken as withdrawal of any challenge to the process .There is no reason for our cars to remain locked up at Chikurubi that's why he sought their release. At no point is he saying he is happy with the process of liquidation neither is he saying he never challenged it.The fact is that we both challenged it which led to our specification .
Mr Moyo was not properly briefed as to the reasons of our specification. We were specified after challenging the sale of the 309 million Century/CFX shares by filing HC 6244-02.As Mr Moyo suggests any evidence that we opposed the sale of the shares will help our case and its clear such evidence exists.
It is sad that Mr Moyo was misled and manipulated into issuing an opinion which will not survive an integrity test and as such other Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe Directors are at risk in their personal capacity for litigation should they still insist on relying on a faulty opinion which was prepared in the absence of full facts.
At this stage I would advise all those in the Interfin team to take a deep breathe and re-consider their views in light of the fact that a lawyer was misled and as a result he gave a legal opinion which is not supported by facts.Mr Sternford Moyo's reputation is on the line, Farai Rwodzi's legacy is on the line , My legacy is on the line. At this stage the ball is in Interfin's court to do the right thing and negotiate their way out of the logjam they have created by trying to conceal the fact that the shares were illegally and irregularly sold in the first place and High Court Case HC-6244-04 is still pending.
ENG Capital capabilities
There is need to understand ENG Capital's ability to mobilise Zimbabwe dollars. At its peak ENG was peerless and unrivalled in the Zimbabwean financial market in its ability to raise and access Zimbabwe dollars.
The ENG Capital Group treasury was made up of the following individual units Century Bank, Century Asset Management, Century Discount House, Leasing Company of Zimbabwe, ENG Asset Management and Hybri Micro-Finance Institution. ENG Capital group had a market capitalisation of US$ 75 million, just before the RBZ descended on the Institution. This made ENG the single biggest combined treasury in the Zimbabwe Financial market.
The installation of RTGS immediately allowed the Authorities to trace which Institutions were the biggest movers of money and the money market. The authorities were alarmed to learn that ENG (an unknown firm to them) and which didn't have a political "Godfather" was allowed to control such resources. A further study was made to trace the political inclination of the shareholders and directors. ENG was not well represented in the political ladders. The belief was that any independent financial resources could be used and was being used to clandestinely support the opposition or politicians deemed undesirable. In addition business owners were supposed to show gratitude by donating and financing the political set up. Any meaningful business group was supposed to be well known and its owners be vetted by the authorities' political process. Any business which didn't fit that bill had to be either closed, nationalised or shareholding restructured.(by any means necessary). Dr Gono needed a high profile scapegoat and start his new career with a bang.
