Zimbabwean businessman Wicknell Chivayo and advocate Fadzayi Mahere have renewed a public dispute over the long-stalled Gwanda Solar Project after Mahere publicly questioned whether Chivayo’s company owes the State millions and whether recent high-value ambulance donations might be partial compensation for that sum. The exchange has re-opened a wider conversation about procurement, project delivery and public accountability in Zimbabwe’s energy sector.
Mahere’s Questions
Advocate Fadzayi Mahere pressed Wicknell Chivayo to clarify whether he still owes the State US$6.5 million for the Gwanda Solar Project, why the project remains incomplete, and if his donation of 20 Land Cruiser ambulances, which she estimated at US$60,000 each, should be seen as philanthropy or a partial set-off against that sum. She further argued that, if the figures were correct, taxpayers would effectively still be owed the equivalent of 88 more ambulances, calling into question Chivayo’s claims of generosity.
Chivayo’s Response
Chivayo replied in a long post that described Mahere’s line of questioning as “ill-thought” and accused critics of ignorance, pointing to a Supreme Court judgment and insisting Intratrek, his company, does not owe ZESA or the State. He wrote in part:
“The tired and IGNORANT reference to the Gwanda Solar Project is quite laughable. Even a first-year law student would know that the SUPREME COURT of Zimbabwe conclusively RULED that Intratrek Zimbabwe (Pvt) Ltd does NOT owe ZESA or the State a single cent !!! Please refer to judgement SC127/23…”
On the ambulances he said:
“These are 2025 STATE-OF-THE-ART, high-end Toyota Land Cruiser units, FULLY EQUIPPED with ICU technology, ventilators, oxygen systems and defibrillators. They are essentially MOBILE CLINICS which should have actually costed more than US$90,000 per unit…”
He also stressed that his philanthropy was separate from contractual matters and closed by praising the government’s Vision 2030.
Project History — How We Got Here
The Gwanda solar scheme was contracted as a 100 MW project during the mid-2010s with an original contract value in the region of US$170–183 million, awarded to Intratrek Zimbabwe with Chinese technical partner CHINT as part of a wider push to add renewable capacity. Implementation was expected in phases with an initial 10 MW first phase discussed in government statements. Over the years the project repeatedly missed deadlines amid disputes over financing, guarantees and fulfillment of contractual “conditions precedent.”
In 2018–2020 the matter moved through the courts and government review processes after ZPC (the Zimbabwe Power Company) raised concerns about progress and payments. Some court rulings and later appeals found the procurement contract remained valid and binding and ordered related remedies; ultimately the Supreme Court’s decisions in late 2023 shaped the legal position between Intratrek and the State.
The State Of The Project And Site A Decade Later
The Gwanda Solar Project remains stalled more than a decade after its inception. Court battles between Intratrek and the Zimbabwe Power Company (ZPC) culminated in a Supreme Court ruling (SC127/23) affirming the contract’s validity, but legal outcomes have not translated into visible progress on the ground.
Site inspections by parliamentarians, journalists and civil-society groups found overgrown land, limited clearing, and negligible infrastructure, reinforcing perceptions of delay. Past criminal probes and parliamentary scrutiny focused on payments made to Intratrek, yet prosecutions failed to secure convictions, while recovery claims were contested in court.
Negotiations to revive the project have been reported but little physical work has materialised.
Public Opinion Remains Divided:
some commend Chivayo’s philanthropy, while others see it as reputation management amid unresolved accountability questions. For many Zimbabweans, Gwanda has become symbolic of state contracts plagued by delays, litigation, and limited returns, raising demands for transparency in energy infrastructure deals.
COMMENTS