Firebrand War Vet and former CIO boss Cde Bombshell Geza fights back as team Mnangagwa declares war on him

HARARE – Blessed “Bombshell” Geza, a prominent Zanu-PF central committee member and liberation war hero, has become the target of what he claims is a calculated smear campaign after publicly demanding President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s resignation. Geza’s bold move follows growing unease over a controversial push by Mnangagwa’s loyalists to extend his term beyond the constitutionally mandated limit of 2028.

The fallout has been swift and severe. Last week, police announced their intention to arrest Geza, a former senior operative with the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO), on a raft of charges including undermining Mnangagwa’s authority, vehicle theft, and inciting public violence.

Party officials, youth league leaders and ministers fell over each other to attack Geza and other war veterans, vowing the 2030 campaign was irreversible.

In a bid to silence the war veterans, Mnangagwa’s allies deployed police to specifically crackdown on Geza, coming up four criminal charges against him, including one of allegedly undermining the authority of and insulting the President.

They even contemplated a murder charge against him.

The army then exfiltrated Geza into safety in South Africa, just like they did Mnangagwa in 2017 after he was fired by Mugabe as vice president. A named security agency was involved in the operation.

Police are hunting for Geza who now faces four criminal charges, including allegedly undermining the authority of and insulting the President. They also contemplating a murder charge against him.

Adding fuel to the fire, Zanu-PF officials, including Justice minister Ziyambi Ziyambi, and the state-controlled media have levelled accusations of murder and perjury against the war veteran. He has also been accused of illegally occupying Harare Safari Lodge, situated on the banks of Lake Chivero, and refusing to compensate the property owner, Brett Allan MacDonald.

However, court records present a different narrative. These records indicate that Geza moved onto the Oatlands property in 2017 at MacDonald’s request. MacDonald, facing a persistent problem with illegal invaders who had occupied the farm on which the lodge is located, sought Geza’s assistance to evict them. Despite obtaining a court order, MacDonald had been unable to remove the invaders.

After Geza successfully intervened, MacDonald allegedly offered to sell the farm and the lodge to the former soldier at a discounted price. Geza then took over the lodge, assuming responsibility for security services, rates, and other statutory obligations.

This arrangement continued for four years, after which MacDonald presented Geza with a formal agreement of sale. The agreement stipulated that Geza was to pay US$1.5 million within 14 days for the lodge and the 460-hectare farm.

Geza refused to sign, arguing that the proposed agreement deviated significantly from their initial understanding in 2017, which only concerned the lodge. He also contended that he could not pay for the farm itself, as it had been acquired by the government as far back as 2005.

McDonald subsequently approached the courts seeking Geza’s eviction. However, he was unsuccessful. High Court judge Justice Joseph Chilimbe, in rulings issued on June 28 and July 1, 2022, determined that the legality of the contract between the two parties needed to be addressed first.

Justice Chilimbe specifically noted the validity of Geza’s argument that the land MacDonald sought to sell belonged to the state. “While one may state that ‘a good’ defence has been raised, the fact amply demonstrates the existence of illegality which itself stands as a significant triable issue,” Justice Chilimbe’s judgment stated. “Accordingly, it is ordered that the application for summary judgment be and hereby dismissed with costs.”

Geza, through his legal representatives at Chimwamurombe Legal Practitioners, has vehemently denied that he invaded the lodge. “The second plaintiff had been evicted using force and violence by some politicians sometime back in 2016 despite there being court orders, which were in his favour,” his response to the court stated. “The second plaintiff then sought the defendant’s intervention on the agreement that the defendant would occupy the premises to secure them from further invasions.”

Geza’s legal team further argued that “Parties had also agreed that after the removal of the invaders the defendant would occupy the premises pending the finalisation of the sale agreement that had been verbally agreed by and between the parties prior the eviction of the invaders.”

In his response, Geza added: “The defendant offered a service to the plaintiffs and as a reward of his services he was to be sold the entire shareholding of the first plaintiff. However, the defendant, after realising the illegalities associated with the agreement, asked the plaintiffs to remedy the impediments whereupon the plaintiffs threatened eviction. The plaintiffs have been showing signs of dishonesty in that since early 2017, the plaintiffs have not been available to conclude the agreement and only appeared in 2020 with threats of eviction, which forced the defendant to sign the agreement without further consultation.”

Accusing MacDonald of perjury, Geza reported him to the police, alleging that MacDonald had lied to the court by claiming that Geza only moved to the lodge in 2020.

Furthermore, Geza has proposed that MacDonald compensate him for his services in removing the invaders and securing the lodge since 2017, should MacDonald no longer wish to sell the property.

In a letter to MacDonald dated October 7, 2022, penned by his lawyers at Chimwamurombe Legal Practice, Geza highlighted that he had been using his own resources to pay bills to Zesa Holdings, the Zimbabwe National Water Authority, and the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority in order to maintain the property.

“Our client has survived a lot of threats for threatening invaders who want to take the place even up to this day and all the endurance was with good intentions,” the lawyers wrote. “Had parties agreed on the purchase of the lodge ever since 2016, our client ought to have been realising some good business. He lost on a potential investment significantly out of respect of Mr BA McDonald.”

The lawyers continued, “Our client was seriously not impressed by the litigation and its burdening costs that were initiated by your client, especially when he was insisting that parties should talk and find the best solution to their dispute. This has raised serious trust issues. More importantly, our client was not impressed by the dishonest averments that your (client) was making in court papers. He feels betrayed and being labelled a property invader is something he did not take lightly given the correspondences the parties have had which clearly show pure intentions on the part of our client.”

Given the seven years Geza has spent safeguarding the property, his lawyers have proposed an “exit package” of US$250,000. Alternatively, they suggested “a lump sum payment as compensation for all that he’s been through in the region of US$250 000 and a nominal shareholding in the company.”

The escalating conflict between Geza and the Zanu-PF establishment raises serious questions about the future of the party and the political landscape in Zimbabwe. Whether the accusations against Geza are legitimate or part of a politically motivated smear campaign remains to be seen.