Zimbabweans React After Elderly Investor Loses Millions As Minister Denies Her Signature 15 Years Later

Elderly Investor Loses Millions After Minister Denies Her Signature 15 Years Later

A 73-year-old investor faces financial ruin after Zimbabwe’s highest court stripped him of a luxury safari lodge because a government minister denied signing a lease that had been accepted as valid for fifteen years. Terry William Kelly poured millions of US dollars (equivalent to tens of millions of Rand) into Chewore Lodge, operating it successfully since 2011, only for the Supreme Court to cancel his 25-year lease agreement in a ruling centred on a disputed signature. The decision has provoked a storm of reaction from citizens, legal experts, and commentators who see it as a critical test for the nation’s investment climate.

The court found the lease for the premier Zambezi Valley destination invalid because it lacked clear ministerial approval. Former Environment Minister Oppah Muchinguri-Kashiri denied authorising the document, despite her printed signature appearing on it. With no one able to prove she personally signed, the court ruled against Kelly, disregarding the state’s long-term acceptance of rent and his substantial investments over a decade and a half.

A Firestorm of Public Reaction Erupts Online

The ruling has triggered an avalanche of comments across social media platform X, with widespread condemnation and concern for Zimbabwe’s business reputation. Prominent lawyer Siphosami Malunga set the tone on January 13th, arguing a key legal principle was ignored:

“IMO- This is a classic case of estoppel. You can’t give someone undisturbed occupation & collect rentals for 15 years & then claim there was no lease simply on the basis that the former minister denies signing the lease. There’s other strong & compelling evidence of a lease.”

This sentiment was echoed by many. Analyst Brighton Mutebuka warned of dire consequences, posting:

“Massive own goal this! Echoes of a bygone era. The Lodge will likely turn into a “white Elephant” as the high end market will avoid it like the plague. Then there will be an inevitable “boomerang effect” on investment from the West & other markets steeped in the rule of law!”

User Mncedisi summed up the perceived damage to investor confidence:

“Facing eviction without compensation after 15 years of development makes long term investment in Zimbabwe look like a high stakes gamble rather than a business venture. It makes the whole Zimbabwe is open for business mantra sound like a complete joke . This is wrong!”

Accusations of a Hostile Takeover and Warnings

A common thread in the reactions is the belief that the legal move masks a deliberate seizure. Investigative journalist Hopewell Chin’ono stated bluntly:

“This case is a textbook example of why property rights in Zimbabwe are meaningless in practice and why no serious investor, local or foreign, can ever feel safe. I can bet my bottom dollar that someone in ZANUPF wants this property, and once they get it, they will run it down as they always do.”

User K provided a lengthy critique, connecting the case to broader historical patterns:

“Give the Zvigananda any plot on the Zambezi and let’s see if they can make it a Tourist attraction. They won’t. They want the already built one which they will abandon after a few braais with their girlfriends… Property and commercial rights are the bed rock of a functional economy. If you can lose millions in investments because a minister ‘can’t remember signing the lease’ then we are fucked.”

Many reactions focused on the absurdity of the state’s position after 15 years of cooperation. Muera shumba questioned:

“Its doesn’t make sense for Oppah to say she didn’t sign it — you are telling me a whole government allowed someone to operate a huge business for 15 years without approval.  Nazu inofunga kuti takapusa hanti (They think we are fools, right?)”

Mo-fela asked a sarcastic legal question:

“…denied signing it. Because no one could prove she personally signed the document… Does this work with all contracts like can you jus say someone cant prove you signed it and it becomes invalid?asking for friend”

A Chorus of Condemnation and Fear for the Future

The outrage crosses professions and borders. Economist Tshepo Machele commented:

“If you don’t respect property rights then no one will invest in the long-run… Africa is the one continent with probably the weakest respect for private property rights. Poverty is not a mystery when you understand the importance of property rights.”

User Carpathian Mzungu expressed a view held by some external observers:

“Come invest in Zimbabwe, then when it looks nice, it will be taken away from you. Same happened with the farms. Nice job Zimbabwe! You guys never fail to amaze us!”

Others lamented the potential fate of the lodge itself. User Free Market Capitalist predicted:

“I’m not a prophet but here’s how it is going to play out: A vene chap (a certain person) will get this property and will start running it down and it will largely be part of the jungle by 2030.”

The human cost was also highlighted. User God’sFavourite appealed:

“Give Terry Kelly his millions back if you’re to steal this from him or let him carry on as he’s clearly run it successfully these people are trying to finish the only thing that is left( tourism)”

From the practical to the philosophical, the reaction has been overwhelmingly critical. User Demi stated:

“I’ve seen a lot of tomfoolery but this takes the cake. So someone can sign an agreement and then just deny it and the court takes their word of mouth over the evident papers. This country is God’s trial mode.”

Kelly, through his company, Suscaden Investments, now faces eviction without compensation for investments reportedly valued in the millions of US dollars. The future of the high-end lodge, which employed numerous locals and attracted international tourists, remains deeply uncertain.