Prophet Freddy accused of ‘legal bullying’ 

Source: Prophet Freddy accused of ‘legal bullying’ – The Standard

PROMINENT property developer Kudakwashe Taruberekera says the move taken by cleric Tapiwa Freddy in approaching the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (Zacc) for a case that had nothing to do with corruption is a malicious move calculated to harass and intimidate other parties.

Taruberekera, the chief executive officer of Craft Properties, said this in his opposing affidavit after Freddy had filed an interdict pendente lite (pending litigation) at the High Court seeking to bar the property developer from facilitating the transfer of a piece of land that he had donated to the cleric pending a court ruling.

Taruberekera and Craft Properties, Winston Guyo, Winsten Precast (Pvt) Ltd, Liu Juan, Xiao Xiangjun, Liu Ri and City of Kadoma are cited as respondents.

In the application Freddy said sometime in 2016, Taruberekera approached him and offered to donate to him four stands, one of which was to be in the names of Freddy’s church – Goodness and Mercy Ministries.

Freddy said the donation was in appreciation and out of gratitude for ministry work.

“I accepted the offer and a deed of donation was executed between first respondent and myself in respect of one of the properties known as Plot No 7510 of Number 5 Mandalay of Sabonabona Farm, Kadoma,” he said.

Freddy said sometime in November 2019, Taruberekera instructed the City of Kadoma to change ownership of the said property from its names to his names in terms of the deed of donation, which was successfully done.

The cleric said he only got to know that the property was not in his name in the City of Kadoma records after he had sent his messenger to the local authority to inquire about the bills and rates.

“I immediately approached the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (Zacc) and on January 28, I made a report with Zacc with reference being RRB No 006443,” Freddy noted in his application.

“Through inquiries done by Zacc and documents provided by the first respondent (Taruberekera and Craft Properties) to Zacc, I discovered that on March 9, 2021 the seventh respondent (City of Kadoma) changed the ownership of the property in its records from my names to second respondent (Guyo)’s names without notifying me either before or after the fact.”

Freddy claims Taruberekera had written a letter to the City of Kadoma claiming that the cleric had failed to honour his obligation in terms of the agreement.

He said council had to transfer the name of the property from Freddy to Taruberekera and Craft Properties.

However, Taruberekera in his opposing affidavit claims Freddy’s move to approach Zacc was calculated to intimidate other parties.

“The action taken by the applicant shows that he knew that he was not the owner and wanted to use the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission to resolve civil disputes,” Taruberekera said.

“There is no legal basis for involving Zacc in circumstances explained by the applicant.

“Approaching Zacc was a malicious move calculated to intimidate. Instead of approaching Zacc one would have expected the applicant to approach the donor to ascertain the correct facts.

“Knowing that the donation was revoked, Zacc was deliberating to harass and intimidate other parties.

“Suffice is to say the applicant having dealt with the first respondent maliciously and rongfully caused the arrest of the deponent and the first respondent in this civil case alleging non-existent fraud.”

Taruberekera said he was surprised that the report was made to Zacc for a case of fraud when the issue was about the revocation of a donation.

The property developer said to further harass him, the matter was reported in Chinhoyi when the property and parties as well as the case arose in Kadoma.

“The case has since been referred to Kadoma, but the harm has already been done since I was arrested and detained for a night while I am only a CEO of first correspondent and not first respondent,” Taruberekera said.

“He had no basis for causing my arrest and detention.”

Taruberekera claims that Freddy was aware of the revocation of the donation and repossession of the said property for a long time.

“Has also realised that his claim of challenging revocation had been prescribed and thought he could revive it through Zacc,” he said.

“Such an act of desperation is unfortunate, especially from a pastor. This remains a purely civil case in which the applicant’s claim has no merit.”

The land developer claims Freddy derives gratification in abusing court processes.

“He now has four proceedings arising from the same act,” Taruberekera said.

“These being the criminal case, the condonation he alleges, the present application and the one for a declaratur.

“Such a splitting of claims is not only unlawful, but exhibits a desperate desire to harass, but throwing everything and anything hoping something will hit a target.”

Taruberekera said the court cannot grant the relief sought based on prescription and revocation of the donation.