ZIMASCO (Pvt) Ltd, a subsidiary of Sinosteel Corporation, has filed a formal complaint with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) against High Court Judge Justice Joel Mambara, alleging judicial impropriety and complicity in a scheme to unlawfully seize the company’s assets.
The complaint, lodged by ZIMASCO CEO John Musekiwa in a letter dated March 21, 2025, accuses Justice Mambara of granting a corporate rescue order under questionable circumstances, leading to what the company describes as a fraudulent attempt to take control of its bank accounts and operations.
Disputed Court Orders
The controversy stems from an application for corporate rescue filed by Avim Investments (Private) Limited against SINOSTEEL ZIMASCO (Private) Limited—an entity that ZIMASCO asserts is separate from ZIMASCO (Pvt) Ltd. According to the company, Justice Mambara granted the order on March 12, 2025 (HCH685/25), without ZIMASCO (Pvt) Ltd ever being served with the application, despite a certificate of service claiming otherwise.
“Notably, this application was never served on ZIMASCO (Private) Limited regardless of the fact that there is a certificate of service purporting that service was effected on SINOSTEEL ZIMASCO (Private) Limited,” Musekiwa wrote.
Furthermore, ZIMASCO argues that Avim Investments did not meet the legal prerequisites for corporate rescue, as there was no prior court order for the payment of a debt—only a letter of demand.
Fast-Tracked Correction Raises Red Flags
On March 19, 2025, Avim Investments’ legal representatives, Valentine Kwande and Wilson Manase, filed a chamber application (HCH1280/25) to correct the court order, attempting to change the named entity from SINOSTEEL ZIMASCO (Pvt) Ltd to ZIMASCO (Pvt) Ltd.
ZIMASCO alleges that this second application was also never served on them, despite procedural requirements demanding that all interested parties be notified. The company further claims that Justice Mambara granted the correction order within three hours of filing, raising suspicions of undue influence.
According to ZIMASCO, Rule 29 of the High Court rules only allows for corrections in cases of ambiguity, patent errors, or omissions—not to introduce an entirely new party into an order. The company insists that any such correction should have been made through a court application, rather than a chamber application, and served properly.
Allegations of Judicial Bias and Case Manipulation
Beyond the procedural irregularities, ZIMASCO questions how both applications—described as “wholly defective”—ended up before the same judge within a week in a court with multiple judges. The company asserts that Kwande specifically requested Justice Mambara to hear the second application, which raises concerns about judicial bias.
ZIMASCO’s complaint accuses Justice Mambara of actively participating in the fraudulent scheme to facilitate an illegal takeover of its assets.
“The Honourable Judge surely could not correct his own order in the absence of the affected parties. The breathtaking speed with which this all took place—from the filing of the order, allocation to Mambara J, reading the papers, granting the order, and issuing it within three hours—suggests judicial impropriety,” the company stated.
ZIMASCO further claims that Justice Mambara colluded with Avim Investments and its legal team to orchestrate the scheme.
“There is only one possible explanation for the actions of the honourable judge, and it is this: Justice Mambara is involved in the fraudulent plot to raid the bank accounts of ZIMASCO (Pvt) Ltd and take over control by fraudulent means, in connivance with the two sets of lawyers and their client.”
Call for Judicial Service Commission Intervention
ZIMASCO is now demanding urgent intervention from the Judicial Service Commission, warning that public confidence in the judiciary is at risk.
“The exposure of the public and users of the legal system to such judicial misconduct is alarming. The JSC must take immediate action to safeguard the integrity of the courts,” the company urged.
As this legal battle unfolds, all eyes are on the JSC and how it will handle these explosive allegations, which could have far-reaching implications for Zimbabwe’s judicial system and business environment.
