Kadoma land dispute case crumbles

The matter, which attracted widespread public and media attention, dates back to 2016 when Craft Properties donated a 4 000-square-metre residential stand — Stand Number 7510 in Mandalay, Sabonabona, Kadoma — to Freddy, widely known as Prophet Freddy.

The state has withdrawn criminal charges in the high-profile land dispute pitting popular cleric Tapiwa Freddy and Kudakwashe Taruberekera, founder and CEO of Craft Properties (Pvt) Ltd, and the company itself, citing insufficient evidence to proceed with prosecution.

The matter, which attracted widespread public and media attention, dates back to 2016 when Craft Properties donated a 4 000-square-metre residential stand — Stand Number 7510 in Mandalay, Sabonabona, Kadoma — to Freddy, widely known as Prophet Freddy.

However, in 2021, Craft Properties revoked the donation, alleging that Freddy had failed to fulfill conditions tied to the agreement.

Early this year, Freddy reported the matter to the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (Zacc), accusing Taruberekera of corruption.

In response, the land developer denied the allegations and accused Freddy of attempting to weaponise the anti-corruption board to settle a civil matter and damage his personal and professional reputation.

Last Thursday Kadoma magistrate Yeukai Dzuda withdrew the criminal charges due to lack of evidence.

The matter was initially brought before the Chinhoyi magistrate’s court on February 7 where Taruberekera was arrested and charged with fraud — charges which were later altered to theft.

After a series of postponements and a transfer to Kadoma magistrates’ court, the case appeared in court on multiple dates - March 20, April 4, April 23, April 30, May 19, June 17, and July 4 — before it was finally withdrawn on July 17.

Taruberekera raised concern over Freddy’s decision to bypass the Zimbabwe Republic Police (ZRP) and report directly to Zacc — suggesting the cleric may have had undue influence within the anti-graft body.

He also alleged that Freddy was receiving confidential updates from within Zacc during the investigation.

“Freddy’s knowledge of my arrest and detention conditions in Chinhoyi in February, including the filthy cells, shows he was being fed real-time information from someone in offices of authority. This is highly irregular,” Taruberekera said.

In a controversial legal move, Freddy did not sue Craft Properties — the company that made the donation — but instead filed a personal complaint against Taruberekera.

Legal experts say these contradicted corporate legal principles.

“If Freddy truly believed there was wrongdoing, he should have pursued legal action against the company, not the individual director,” said one legal expert.

“Targeting Taruberekera personally seemed intended more to inflict reputational damage than to seek redress.”

Notably, Freddy only appeared in court once, reportedly to request a change of dates.

“Finally, the state withdrew the case against me and Craft Properties after failing to find any evidence to support their claims,” said Taruberekera outside the Kadoma court last Thursday.

“This matter dragged my name and the company’s name through the mud.

“Our 17-year legacy has been severely tarnished.”

He accused Freddy of using state institutions to intimidate and harass him.

“I don’t know what his real motives were. He knew the donation had been revoked. It’s clear now he wanted to damage our company’s reputation,” Taruberekera said.

“I lost trust with clients and partners, and we incurred significant legal costs. I will consult my lawyers about recovering these losses.”

The land developer emphasised that Craft Properties has never faced any criminal conviction and takes pride in its clean international record.

He also referenced past controversies involving Freddy, including the demolition of his Glen View church in 2020 and 2023 due to illegal construction.

“This company will not allow anyone to abuse public institutions for personal vendettas,” Taruberekera said.

“We are considering legal options to ensure accountability for this abuse of process.”

Related Topics